, 1879-01-08

tfuhttcs. While many references IN Lna Wal
Indicated a general charitable Intention or re
part Of The tcetntnr, md asuppositlon that the
tsuateea wonid probably found ch&t1tah'e
Institution. yet they did not eonsatn the e.
preston OF an affirmative wish, direction, or ue
language Of tho entire will II n,nst bo held that
tho teatator gave expreksion to clear .nd
manifest intention to vest h'S trustees Mltn
discretion 10 devote The restduary fund to found
Ing an insttsutton, either charitable Or non
charitable, sccortlfnH to which might do "thc
most positive aud enduring good and thc least
HARM" ANY attempt to narrow or nh!tdgo the
discretion thus clearly and with manifest pur-
pose given to the trustees Would only be ano.
stitutlnR Tho will Of the Court for tic viii Of
tho te.tator. The bequest must stand or ~.
~ the testat0F had seen ut to make
wherever It could. teatamentary disf'osisfnns
Of property atnl especially bcquests ftl chnrtta-
bio uses such RESULT could not be attained con-
trary to the ctcar1y-cxpresse1 Intention Of the
vail even though failure Of tho bcquett might
ba tho consequence. Tne rules Of construction
could not be strained to bring devise within
the rules nj law. Nor was the doctrine OF
lie fund 1as onee deda!tel, M desotsi 70 eha!ity,
and no mode for lts application was prescribed,
or the motIo faiod which wAs. selected by the
testst0r. Then tho courts, under tho ~ pres
power, would subst'tuts some other mode Of
prevent q failure OF the Charity. Tho resduary
hequcst, therefore, at least Is iar a. tho
Trustees wera concerned, wss void for un'
certainty.
Tho uoxt question WA whether, on failure OF
the trust in tho Trustees, the fund should 20 to
tho Homo for the Frftpdlcsf or TO the heir Ut
Law. But tho condition on which the estate
went to the Home was not a mere lalnFt Of tho
choice Of the Trustees II 10 whether It should
20 to charitable or uon-charftable Institution.
Tho Home did not occupy tho position OF =
res!duaFy lcgatec. but mas only named BY way
ttona frum which tho Trustees were empowered
to select. Precisely thu same tnJc.tnttencss and
unccE Etalnty prevailed tho trust IN the hands Of
tho Trustee extended to and vitiated those pro-
Visions Of the will relating to the Home Of tte
Fsfend,esk, BY tho terms OF tht will. tho
Tr1iatees might ticvoto tho fund to that parttcn-
lar charity, but they were not hut1nd 50 to at,.
Ply IT, nor could tho courts cocreo them 50
tho disposition Of tie s30, 600 gfvcn to the son
In case OF hls death without Issue. The nrovs'
on was that It should 60 VITO tho charitable trl-
sttutions hereinafter mentioned, Or to such
snff ETH ss1:ass sse tas viii g.
voted that tund to charity and nothing else. 4
charitable inatttutton-tho Hone for tho Friend
less---wns pnmcd In the will, and tho executors
ie thc event named could gtve the fund to that
for charity. 1t Mastered not how uncertain tlis
persona OF the objccts might be, Of whether tho
persons who were TO take were tn csso or nut. q
| whether tho legatee wcro corporation capable
lcgacy and Rivo It effect Tho disposition Of thu
| sbb,OU0 Ia case OF the death Of tho 900 without
iaauo was a. valid bequest 10 charity, and shout
| be sustained a. sucl,. For tho above reason
| the decree Of the Court below would TO EeyerBce
and a decree cntarcd in fayor Of the origina
| com mDlaiuank.