TESTAMENTARY LAW 3495

Cited but not construed in Taylor v. Watson, 35 Md. 529; Carrington v. Rogers, 1
Gill, 410.
As to the jurisdiction of equity over suits for legacies, see art. 16, sec. 105.

1929, ch. 543.

341. In all wills executed after July 1, 1929, unless a contrary
intention is expressly stated in the will, the provisions of Section 340 in
regard to lapse shall apply to all devises and bequests to two or more per-
sons as a class in the same manner as though such devises or bequests had
been made to such persons by their individual names.

Cited in construing Sec. 138. Weaver v. McGonigall, 170 Md. 217.

An. Code, 1924, sec. 336. 1912, sec. 327. 1904, sec. 321. 1888, sec. 314. 1825, ch. 119.

342. In every will whereby any lands or real property shall be devised
to any person, and no words of perpetuity or limitation are used in such
devise, the devisee shall take under and by virtue of such devise the entire
and absolute estate and interest of the testator in such lands or real prop-
erty, unless it shall appear, by devise over or by words of limitation or
otherwise, that the testator intended to devise a less estate and interest.

Application of this section.

A contingent limitation over is not inconsistent with a devise of a fee simple estate,
and, therefore, does not interfere with application of this section. Devecmon v. Shaw,
70 Md. 225; Gambrill v. Forest, etc., Lodge, 66 Md. 25; Estep v. Mackey, 52 Md. 599;
Bradford v. Mackenzie, 131 Md. 334.

This section held not to apply because it did appear that testator intended to devise
a less estate, etc. Fairfax v. Brown, 60 Md. 55; Stonebreaker v. Zollickoffer, 52 Md.
170; Hammond v. Hammond, 8 G. & J. 442; Boyle v. Parker, 3 Md. Ch. 46.

This section does not apply where devise is not of lands or real estate but of their
rents and profits, and where it appears that testator intended a less estate. Boyle v.
Parker, 3 Md. Ch. 44.

Prior to adoption of this section law was to contrary, and this section has no retro-
active effect. Preston v. Evans, 56 Md. 487; Moody v. Elliott, 1 Md. Ch. 293; Pue v.
Pue, 1 Md. Ch. 387.

This section applied. Whitley v. Jump, 94 Md. 189; Henderson v. Henderson 64 Md.
192.

This section held to have no application to a will because it appeared from the clear
language of will that testator intended to devise a life estate only. Pattison v. Parley
130 Md. 411.

Generally.

Gift to testator's wife of absolute estate held not to have been restricted to life
estate by a subsequent clause indicating his wish as to how she should dispose of the
residue by her will. Gosnell v. Liebman, 162 Md. 542.

Under this section and sec. 12 of art. 21, deeds and assignments, as well as wills,
though without words of limitation or perpetuity, are presumed to carry such estate
as the grantor, etc., has power to convey, etc., and not an estate limited to the life of
the grantor, etc., unless a contrary intention is clearly shown. Case v. Marshall, 159
Md. 594.

This section apparently grew out of the opinion in Beall v. Holmes, 6 H. & J. 208.
This section reverses rule that a life estate passed by a general devise without words of
limitation. Burden of proof. Backus v. Presbyterian Assn., 77 Md. 59. And see Shreve
v. Shreve, 43 Md. 402; Hammond v. Hammond, 8 G. & J. 441.

Subsequent qualifying language in a will held to modify previous language so as
to cut down a son's fee simple estate to a life interest. The gift which is posterior in
local position usually prevails, the subsequent words denoting a subsequent intention.
When word "desire" in a will is mandatory. Grieves v. Grieves, 132 Md. 305.

This section referred to in deciding that use of words "their heirs, executors and
assigns" in a will was not controlling. Bradford v. Mackenzie, 131 Md. 334.

An absolute estate held to pass by a will under this section; cases distinguished.
Effect of this section. Johns Hopkins University v. Garrett, 128 Md. 347.

A devise held to create a life estate only in view of limitations over, and the direc-
tion that devisee was "to have the management and control of the same." Nowland v.
Welch, 88 Md. 52.

Under a devise to A. during her life, and upon her death to her children, if she have
any, the mother takes a life estate and any child or children she has, a remainder in
fee. Stump v. Jordan, 54 Md. 629; Williams v. Armiger, 129 Md. 230.