
    Estate of Mary E. Bryson, deceased. Appeal of the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church.
    
      Will — Construction—Charitable gift — Latent ambiguity.
    
    The intention of a testatrix in the matter of a charitable bequest is not to be frustrated simply because of a latent ambiguity. The legacy does not lapse because of such ambiguity, if it can be explained and the intention of the testatrix made clear by extrinsic evidence.
    A bequest to the Foreign Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church held to be intended for the missionary society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, there being no society bearing the first name and the latter having charge of the foreign missionary work of the church.
    Argued May 12, 1898.
    Appeal, No. 176, April T., 1898, by the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, from decree of O. C. Beaver Co., Dec. T., 1897, No. 5, in dis tribution.
    Before Rice, P. J., Wickham, Beaver, Reeder, Orlad y, Smith and Porter, J J.
    
    Reversed.
    Exceptions to auditor’s report. Before Wilson, P. J.
    The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion of the court.
    Under will of decedent a legacy of 11,000 was claimed by the Methodist Episcopal Church at Beaver Falls and by the missionary society of the Methodist Episcopal Church. The court below held that there was a latent ambiguity and that the legacy lapsed. The missionary society of the Methodist Episcopal Church appealed.
    
      Errors assigned were (1) in deciding from the will and the evidence that the legacy to the foreign missionary society of the Methodist Episcopal Church lapsed. (2) In the conclusions of law by the court below as follows: “ 1. As there is no society known as the ‘ Foreign Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church’ there is latent ambiguity in the bequest of the testatrix to such society, and the legacy must, therefore, lapse. 2. The exceptions to the auditor’s report must be dismissed and the same confirmed absolutely.”
    
      Alfred S. Moore, with him Winfield S. Moore, for appellant.
    It is well settled that charitable legacies will not fail in consequence of the indefiniteness of the object, and where there are two charities of the same name, the legacy will be divided between them, if it cannot be determined which was intended: 2 Redfield on Wills, 401; 1 Jarman on Wills, 376.
    An imperfect description of the donor will not render the gift void unless the ambiguity be such that it is impossible-either from the will or other proper evidence to ascertain who is the object of the testator’s bounty: Congregational Society v. Hatch, 48 N. H. 393; Straw v. Church, 67 Me. 493.
    Where the name used does not designate with precision any corporation, but when the circumstances come to be proved, so many of them concur to indicate that a particular one was intended, and no similar circumstances appear to identify any other, the one thus shown to be intended will take: Dunham v. Averill, 45 Conn. 61; s. c. 29 Am. Rep. 642. See also Button v. Tract Society, 23 Vt. 336. The devise in this case, to the American Home Mission Tract Society was held to operate in favor of the American Tract Society, there being no such devisee as the one described. Devise awarded to latter society. See also Appeal of Washington and Lee University, 111 Pa. 572, 583 ; Cresson’s Appeal, 30 Pa. 437, 450 ; Appeal of Missionary Society, 30 Pa. 425; Appeal of Penna. Home for Blind Women, 3 Penny. 429; Newell’s Appeal, 24 Pa. 198; Witman v. Lex, 17 S. & R. 88.
    
      Robert Ritchie, with him David K. Cooper, for appellee.
    In all of the cases cited by the counsel for the appellant, one of three conditions existed, all of which are absent in the present case. (1) Words were used in some part of the will which taken in connection with explanatory evidence show the party for whom the legacy was intended, as in the appeal of Washington and Lee University, 111 Pa. 572. (2) There being a latent ambiguity, the party was fixed definitely by parol testimony. (3) The object being uncertain, a discretionary power was vested in some one over the application of the grantor’s bounty, as in The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society’s Appeal, 30 Pa. 425; McLain v. Township, 51 Pa. 196; Zeisweiss v. James, 63 Pa. 465; Kinike’s Estate, 155 Pa. 101; Witman v. Lex, 17 S. & R. 88.
    There is nothing in the will or in the evidence that shows that either one of the societies named in the evidence or any other society was intended by the testator.'
    July 29, 1898:
   Opinion by

Beaver, J.,

The testatrix, a member of the Methodist Episcopal Church in Beaver Falls, Pa., bequeathed $1,000 to the “ Foreign Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church.” It appears, from the evidence, that there is no society in this church bearing this precise name. The assignment of error relates to the conclusion of law reached by the court below which is as follows: “As there is no society known as the Foreign Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, there is latent ambiguity in the bequest of testatrix to such society and the legacy must, therefore, lapse.”

The intention of the testatrix is not to be frustrated simply because of a latent ambiguity. The legacy would not necessarily lapse because of such ambiguity, if it can be explained and the intention of the testatrix made clear by extrinsic evidence. This much is clear from the terms of the will — that the testatrix desired $1,000 of her estate to be expended in the cause of foreign missions administered by the Methodist Episcopal Church. It appears from the evidence that there is a corporation known as “ The Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church ” which has charge of the general missionary work of the church, both at home and abroad. It does not appear that there were two claimants for this legacy as such. It appears in the evidence, however, that there is the missionary society of the Methodist Episcopal Church and subordinate to it and under the supervision of its authority the woman’s foreign missionary society of the Methodist Episcipal Church, whose distinctive work is among the women of foreign countries. It would seem from the evidence that the work of foreign missions and of home missions, although carried on under the direction of the same society, are distinct and the expenditures kept entirely separate. The evidence shows that the missionary society expends in its foreign work about $550,000 per year, exclusive of what is expended for woman’s work by the women’s society, which is about $250,000 per year.

Reading the will in the light of this testimony, it seems to us very clear that the testatrix not only intended that the bequest of $1,000 was to the missionary society of the Methodist Episcopal Church but that her intention, clearly expressed in the will, can be fully carried out by paying the legacy to this society, inasmuch as it would take whatever may be received from the estate, subject to the trust impressed upon it by the testatrix, namely, its expenditure in the work of foreign missions. This is in accordance with the well-known principle strikingly exemplified in Appeal of Washington & Lee University, 111 Pa. 572: kk Where there are two parties claiming a legacy, neither of whom bear the name of the legatee in the will and it is uncertain which is the one intended by the testator, if either, it must be determined by a consideration of all the language used and by proof of all the facts and surrounding circumstances.” The authorities upon this subject are very fully set forth in the report of this case. It is unnecessary to multiply them here, but see the Domestic & Foreign Missionary Society’s Appeal, 30 Pa. 425, in which it was held that a legacy to the missions and schools of the Episcopal Church about to be established at or near Port Cresson upon the western coast of Africa is a good charitable bequest to the Domestic & Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America.

The assignments of error are sustained, the decree of the court below is reversed and the record is remitted, with instructions to make distribution of the estate of the testatrix as if the bequest to the Foreign Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church had been made to the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church.

As it does not clearly appear who the appellee in this case is, the costs will be paid out of the estate.  