I cannot understand this will.

[HarrysMum]

I'm having trouble with a will.

The will Zoe kindly transcribed for me was fairly straight forward. Elizabeth Naylor (nee Eyre) was a widow with one living child, Elizabeth (wife of Myles Ariel).
Elizabeth Naylor leaves a couple of people some money, then leaves a fair bit of money in stocks, etc to her grandchildren, either when they attain 21 or when the marry.

She then leaves all her real estate to her daughter for the term of her natural life, then after her death, to the grandchildren.

Could that stand up in court???? OR.... would Elziabeth Ariel then be able to do what she wanted with it in her will??

This is in 1830.

Then in 1837....Elizabeth Ariel dies, leaving everything to her husband, Myles for his natural life, then after his death, to their children.

BUT..

On the end of Elizabeth Ariel's will is this....

On the 1st of June 1839 Admon, with the will annexed of the Goods, Chattels and Credits of Elizabeth Ariel, wife of Myles Ariel, late of the city of Bristol deceased was granted to Robert Leonard and Edward Jarrett Ransford the Executors having been first sworn by Canon duly to administer. The said Myles Ariel the lawful husband of the said deceased and as such the only person entitled to her personal estate over which she had us disposing power and concerning which she is dead intestate having first consented as by Acts of Courts appears.


Now.....Elizabeth Ariel died 1837 (I have the cert). Her widower, Myles remarries in Feb 1839, so he's married again by the above date.

Could it be that married women weren't entitled to leave wills??? Everything mentioned in the will was given to Elziabeth by her mother or father independent of any current or future husband.

Any ideas???