ADDISON v. BOWIE. 627

is a local habitation, a place of residence. It is a right to have
the enjoyment of a certain house, as a dwelling place. The right
of habitation is confined to so much as is necessary for the habita-
tion of him to whom it is granted, and his family. It is the dona-
tion of a privilege, so absolutely personal in its nature, that it can-
not be leased or assigned to another, nor is it such an estate, as if
given to several, can be separated by partition, and given"to each
one in severalty. The party to whom it is given, may enjoy or
leave it at pleasure; but he cannot claim compensation for it from
any one, unless he has been hindered in, or driven from the enjoy-
ment of it; of which, there being here no allegation, there need be
no inquiry as to the value of this bequest to any one of these
legatees, (p)

The testator William, then proceeds to direct, 'that all the pro-
perty be kept together, and worked by the family slaves, until my
son Walter shall arrive to full age, for the support of the family.'
This is a provision made by a husband and a parent, for his family;
and therefore, should have a construction, at least co-extensive
with what his duties were, when he was alive. His family was right-
fully composed of his wife and his infant children; each of whom,
as such, during his life, was entitled to a reasonable and proper
maintenance from him according to his means and circumstances.
Hence, it is fair to presume, that he intended by these comprehen-
sive expressions in his will, to have his property so applied, as
most effectually to accord with the duties of a husband and a parent.
Being satisfied that this was the general intention of this provision,
I am of opinion, that the support here directed to be given, must
be such as is suitable for each legatee, having a proper regard to
circumstances, and the extent of the fund so charged with their
support. Therefore, with respect to the infant children, it must be
construed to embrace a suitable education for each, as well as
board and clothing. When a daughter marries, she ceases to be
a member of her father's family, she puts off his authority, and has
no longer any claim upon him for support; therefore, in this in-
stance, no one of these infants can have awarded to her, after her
marriage, any portion of that which is here given 'for the support
of the family.'

The testator William, it is evident, intended that the property

(p) Co. Litt. 122, a.; Ayliffe, Civil Law, b. 3, tit 7; Domat, b. 1, tit. 11,
s. 2; Code Napole. Civil, s. 633, 634; Warfield v. Gambrill, 1 G. & J. 503.