The  case  in  the  Common  Pleas  is  still  more  distinct  The  money
was  not  at  all  the  property  of  the  testatrix.  It  was  to  be  paid  not  to
her  executor,  but  to  such  person  as  she  should  appoint.  It  was  claimed
by  the  same  person,  executor  and  residuary  legatee.  Nothing  can  go
as  part  of  the  residue,  that  would  not  go  to  the  executor ;  and  clearly
there  the  executor  was  not  entitled ;  it  was  made  payable  to  her  ap-
pointee purposely  to  exclude  the  executor.  How  does  this  case  stand  ?
It  is  material  to  consider,  what  the  interest  was,  that  she  took  under


382


POWBBS


(Parts


her  husband's  will,  and  what  has  she  done.  She  was  entitled  for  life
to  the  income  of  all  the  residue  of  his  real  and  personal  estate ;  and  a
moiety  was  given  to  her  absolute  disposal  by  any  deed  or  writing  or  by
her  will  attested  by  two  witnesses.  She  was  not  limited  as  to  objects;
and  as  to  the  mode  it  was  as  ample  a  latitude,  as  any  one  could  have.
