
    
      John Gibson and others vs. James S. M‘Call and others.
    
    M. S. by will duly executed, bequeathed “unto the Methodist Church at Darlington Court House” (an unincorporated society,) and the “ Preachers of the said circuit, and the Peedee Mission, eight thousand dollars, to be selected by the Trustees of said church out of my papers; the said eight thousand dollars to be put at interest forever, and the interest to be paid annually, and to be distributed by said Trustees according to the several necessities of said church, preachers and mission.” Held that the bequest was valid.
    The law in relation to devises and bequests to charitable uses, considered. Vide note.
    
    
      Before Earle, J. at Darlington, Spring Term, 1841.
    This was an issue devisavit vel non, on appeal from the Ordinary, who had admitted to probate, as a testamentary paper, an instrument in writing signed by Moses Sanders, in the presence of four subscribing witnesses. The instrument was as follows :
    “South Carolina, )
    
      Darlington District. $
    
      Know all Men by these Presents, That I, Moses Sanders, of the State and District aforesaid, for the natural good will, love and affection which I have and do bear towards the Methodist Church at Darlington Court House, as also the Preachers of said Circuit, and the Peedee Mission, have given, granted and bequeathed, and do by these presents give, grant and bequeath unto the said Church, Preachers of the said Circuit, and the Peedee Mission, the sum of Eight Thousand Dollars, good and lawful money, to be selected by the Trustees of said Church out of my papers; the said eight thous- and dollars to be put to interest forever, and the interest to be paid annually, and to be distributed by said Trustees, according to the several necessities of said Church, preachers and mission.
    All and singular the above eight thousand dollars, to have, hold and use ; and I do warrant and forever defend the above eight thous- and dollars, the right to said Church, Preachers and Mission forever, against myself, my heirs or assigns, or any other person or persons, lawfully claiming or to claim the same, or any part thereof. In witness, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, this 7th November, 1838.”
    Three questions were made : — 1. Whether the deceased was of sound mind at the time of its execution. 2. Was it executed as a testamentary paper, and intended only to take effect on the death of the deceased. 3. Was it sufficient on its face to take effect as a testament, or was it void for uncertainty as to the persons who were to take, and who were to be the beneficiaries.
    The Methodist Church at Darlington was not a corporation. A volume containing the discipline and creed of the church, as well as the regulations for its temporal government, was in evidence ; and a manuscript book containing minutes of the proceedings of the Darlington Church, was likewise in evidence. There were Trustees in office, regularly appointed, at the date of the paper.
    His Honor submitted the two first questions to the jury, advising, them, if they should be of opinion that the deceased was of sound and disposing mind and memory, and that he executed this instrument as his will, and not as a deed, intending it to take effect in the event of his death, and after his death, that then they should find the paper submitted to them to be the last will and testament of Moses Sanders ; that - although he considered the other question both difficult and doubtful, yet he thought there was enough on the face of the paper to enable the Trustees to fake.
    The jury found a verdict for the defendants on the appeal, thereby confirming the decree of the Ordinary.
    The plaintiffs appealed, and now moved for a new trial, on the ground that the paper admitted to probate is null and void.
    1. Because the Methodist Church at Darlington was not incorporated.
    , 2. Because neither said Church nor the Trustees thereof, could take in the way intended by the Testator. .
    
      3. Because the cestuique trusts, or beneficiaries, are un certain.
    
      Dargan for the motion.
    
      Sims contra.
   Per Curiam.

The motion is dismissed in this case, upon the grounds stated in the equity case of the Attorney General and others vs. Jolly.

Signed by JohNson, Harper, Johnston and Dunkin, CC. and Richardson, O’Neall, Evans, Butler, Ward-law and Frost, JJ.  