Thanks for your reply, Nigel - and I didn't think you'd ignored my question.

"A.. The trouble is we do not know the full picture with regard to a possible 'inter vivos' (i.e. lifetime) disposal, that is if mother set up the eldest son (or even another child) for example when he/she got married. This would fall within the contemplation of the father's will. If mother sat tight and did nothing, then as she died before 1960, the landed property (including any houses or shops etc) would pass on intestacy to the heir at law. The administrattion of her estate would exclude the land unless the personal estate was insolvent.

It would help if we knew what they owned. Browns Directory 1894 is pretty good in this regard. "
.
.
This is the relevant wording of the 1902 Will: "I leave devise and bequeath to my wife the whole of my real and personal Estate House Phaeton Cash harness household furniture and Effects and all moneys to me belonging other than the foregoing legacies of whatever nature or wheresoever found the Same to be held by her in her own absolute right and to be disposed of by her as in her judgment may seem right.--------"

There were also small bequests to a granddaughter and his youngest son, and the sharing of an awaited Legacy from an aunt.

Re-reading the photocopy I wonder if the word I read as House is actually Horse - which would go with the Phaeton, I suppose. However, I thought 'real estate' meant land/house. At the time of writing the will the testator was living in Hatfield Grove, and in 1894 in Chester St. They seem to move house pretty frequently so I assumed it was rented accommodation. His own father inherited property in Michael around 1865 but didn't seem to do anything about it so I'm not convinced that is what is referred to, nor does family tradition seem to be aware of it. I haven't identified that property yet but would love to know more about the story around that.

There is said to have been a falling out between the eldest son and his family on account of his marriage in 1904.

Fundamental to family lore is the following excerpt: "I leave devise and bequeath to my executrix for the benefit of my children the legacy left me and which I expect to come from Australia from the Estate of my late aunt. My eldest Son is not to have any Share in the above legacy. ------- " which has been passed down as meaning not to have any share of any part of the Estate, and the tradition is that he actually received nothing.

I have not been able to trace this Australian Legacy either!

I suppose what I'm trying to establish is whether he missed out on his due on account of a misunderstanding of the will, or whether, if his mother was entitled to withhold things from him through being piqued by his choice of wife (although that was a couple of years later). Too late now of course, but I wonder if he could have done anything about it.