purchaſe, but deſcent. In ſhort, whenever an eſtate in joint-tenancy or coparcenary is diſſolved, ſo that there be no partition made, but the unity of poſſeſſion continues, it is turned into a tenancy in common.
A tenancy in common may alſo be created by expreſs limitation in a deed: but here care muſt be taken not to inſert words which imply a joint eſtate; and then if lands be given to two or more, and it be not joint-tenancy, it muſt be a tenancy in common. But the law is apt in it's conſtructions to favour joint-tenancy rather than tenancy in common[1]; becauſe the diviſible ſervices iſſuing from land (as rent, &c) are not divided, nor the entire ſervices (as fealty) multiplied, by joint-tenancy, as they muſt neceſſarily be upon a tenancy in common. Land given to two, to be holden the one moiety to one, and the other moiety to the other, is an eſtate in common[2]; and, if one grants to another half his land, the grantor and grantee are alſo tenants in common[3]: becauſe, as has been before[4] obſerved, joint-tenants do not take by diſtinct halves or moieties; and by ſuch grants the diviſion and ſeveralty of the eſtate is ſo plainly expreſſed, that it is impoſſible they ſhould take a joint intereſt in the whole of the tenements. But a deviſe to two perſons, to hold jointly and ſeverally, is a joint-tenancy; becauſe that is implied in the word "jointly," even though the word "ſeverally" ſeems to imply the direct reverſe[5]: and an eſtate given to A and B, equally to be divided between them, though in deeds it hath been ſaid to be a joint-tenancy[6], (for it implies no more than the law has annexed to that eſtate, viz. diviſibility[7]) yet in wills it is certainly a tenancy in common[8]; becauſe the deviſor may be preſumed to have meant what is moſt beneficial to both the deviſees, though his meaning is imperfectly expreſſed. And this nicety in the wording of grants makes it the moſt uſual as well as the ſafeſt
