ordinary rules of construction, the true meaning | 43 L. J., Ch. 775; 30 L. T. 248; 22 W. R. and intention of the testator, both as to the 572. bequest itself and the mode of carrying it into effect, without in the first instance adverting to the existence of the Statute of Mortmain (9 Geo. 2, c. 36). Tatham v. Drummond, 4 De G., J. & S. 484. When the intention of the testator has been ascertained, inquiry is to be made whether the whole or any part of that intention is contrary to the provisions of the statute. But no secondary interpretation ought to be adopted, nor ought the court to resort to any different mode of administration from that indicated by the testator, even though it may be reasonable in itself, for the purpose of escaping from the operation of the statute. lb. c. Validity and Effect. Under Incorporating Statutes.]-A charity by its statute of incorporation authorized to receive money “paid, given, devised, or bequeathed" to it, and with licence in mortmain "to take, receive, hold and enjoy" any lands or interest in lands, for the purposes of the charity, cannot take by bequest money secured on lands. Nethersole v. Indigent Blind School, 11 L. R., Eq. 1; 40 L. J., Ch. 26; 23 L. T. 723; 19 W. R. 174. Disabled by subsequent Statute.]-By a statute of Queen Anne a corporation was established to provide for the relief of the poor within a district, with power to raise money for that purpose, and it was enacted that it might without licence in mortmain acquire land by gift or devise, and that any persons might without further licence give or devise land to it. After the passing of 9 Geo. 2, c. 36, several acts relating to this corporation were passed, giving it additional powers, but not referring to the abovementioned clause as to acquiring land, and in these acts were contained clauses providing that the clauses and powers of the former acts should remain in force and be executed as fully as if they were therein re-enacted :-Held, that the charity was not exempted from the operation of 9 Geo. 2, c. 36; and that a bequest to it of moneys to arise from the sale of real estate was void. Luckraft v. Pridham, 6 Ch. D. 205; 46 L. J., Ch. 744; 37 L. T. 204; 26 W. R. 33. Affirming 36 L. T. 501; 25 W. R. 747. What are Charitable Gifts charity and education, is not a charitable gift within 43 Eliz. c. 4. Cocks v. Manners, 12 L. R., Eq. 574; 40 L. J., Ch. 640; 24 L. T. 869; 19 W. R. 1053. A testator gave "to each of ten poor clergymen to be selected by A.," 2007. A. duly selected ten clergymen :-Held, that these legacies were not charitable legacies within 9 Geo. 2, c. 36, but general legacies. Thomas v. Howell, 18 L. R., Eq. 198; 43 L. J., Ch. 799; 30 L. T. 244; 22 W. R. 676. To Religious Society.]-A gift to a religious society, the members of which spend their time in devotional By a private act the Indigent Blind School was exercises and retirement within their own instiincorporated and empowered to have, hold, re-tution, and do not engage in any public acts of ceive and retain any sums of money, paid, given, devised, or bequeathed by any person for the charitable purposes in the act mentioned; and also to purchase, take, or receive, and thenceforth hold and enjoy any lands, tenements, and hereditaments, in the whole not exceeding two acres, without incurring any of the penalties for forfeitures of the Statutes of Mortmain. The surplus funds of the corporation were also permitted to be invested on mortgage, and the lands, when released or foreclosed, might be held by the corporation for a period not exceeding two years. The Female Orphan Asylum was incorporated by an act containing a similar clause. By another act the Deaf and Dumb Asylum was rendered capable to obtain, acquire, hold and retain, for the purposes of the institution, any moneys and other personal estate and property, including moneys secured by mortgage of, or charged upon, or to arise from the sale of any hereditaments; with a proviso that nothing therein contained should make valid any grant which would be void or impeachable under 9 Geo. 2, c. 36-Held, that bequests of debts secured to the testator's estate by equitable mortgage of leaseholds to these charities were void. Chester v. Chester, 12 L. R., Eq. 444; 19 W. R. 946. A hospital was empowered by an act of parliament by which it was incorporated, by will, gift, purchase or otherwise, to obtain, acquire, hold, and retain land for the purposes of the charity; and also by will, gift, purchase or otherwise, to obtain, acquire, hold and maintain, for the purposes of the charity, any kind of personal estate, including money secured on mortgage charged on land-Held, that those words implied a power to devise land for the use of the charity, and therefore, that where a testator gave certain legacies to this as well as other charities out of a mixed fund of realty and personalty, the charity in question was entitled to receive the legacy in full. Perring v. Trail, 18 L. R., Eq. 88; A testator directed that his debts and legacies (other than charitable legacies) should be paid by his executors out of his impure personalty, and his charitable legacies out of his pure personalty. The pure personalty was insufficient to pay all the charitable legacies in full. In December, 1871, he borrowed 8,000l. of his bankers, to be repaid in March, 1872. The sum was placed to his credit on a loan account. He died in February, 1872, having, at the day of his death, 6291. standing to his credit on his general drawing account:-Held, that the executors were not bound to pay, out of the impure personalty, the whole amount of the debt due on the loan account at the day of the death, but only the difference between that amount and the amount then standing to the testator's credit on his general drawing account. Ib. Devise to Bishop of B. for time being, in trust for Sisters of Mercy at B.]-A testator by his will devised his freehold lands to the use of the bishop of B. for the time being, in trust for the Sisters of Mercy at B. The testator then left the residue of his property to his executors and trustees to pay to the said bishop, for the time being, 1,000l., which he directed was to be forthwith applied for the benefit of the Convent of Mercy at B. It was proved that at the time of the testator's death the Sisters of Mercy at B. numbered about ten or twelve, and that the objects of the sisterhood were essentially charitable : Held, that the trust of the land in favour of the sisters was valid, as one simply for the individual ladies who, at the testator's death, filled the position of Sisters of Mercy at B. Delany's Estate, In re, 9 L. R., Ir. 226-C. A. Roman Catholic Church.]-The prohibition of monastic bodies in the Roman Catholic Relief Act, 1829 (10 Geo. 4, c. 7), applies to such bodies as settled in the realm after the passing of the act as well as to those who were then residing in it-Held, therefore, that a trust for the benefit of a church belonging to the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, who came to Ireland in 1838, having left it in 1690, and who are bound by religious or monastic vows, is void. Liston v. Keegan, 9 L. R., Ir. 531. To build a Church subject to Conditions.]-A legacy towards the expense of building a church, with a provision that if the church should not be commenced in the testator's lifetime, or within two years after his death, or if it should not be erected within half a mile of a certain place, then the legacy should not be payable, is invalid as being within the Statute of Mortmain. Pratt v. Harvey, 12 L. R., Eq. 544; 25 L. T. 200; 19 W. R. 950. Endowment of Future Church.]-A gift for the endowment of a future church is not void under the Mortmain Act, 9 Geo. 2, c. 36. Sinnett v. Herbert, 7 L. R., Ch. 232; 41 L. J., Ch. 388; 26 L. T. 7; 20 W. R. 270. Varying 12 L. R., Eq. 201; 40 L. J., Ch. 509; 24 L. T. 778; 19 W. R. 946. A testatrix gave the residue of her personal estate to trustees upon trust to be by them applied in aid of erecting or endowing an additional church at A.:-Held, that the gift was not intended to be confined to a church to be erected or commenced before her death, but was applicable to any future church. Ib. An inquiry was directed whether the residuary personal estate could be employed in aid of erecting or endowing an additional church at A. Ib. When pure and impure personalty is given to trustees to erect or endow a church, they are entitled, under 43 Geo. 3, c. 108, to 5007. out of the impure personalty, in addition to the whole of the pure personalty. Ib. A bequest to a church diocesan building society towards building and endowing a church, but without referring to an existing site or expressly excluding the application of the money to the acquisition of land, is void, except to the extent of 500l. Lee, In re, 27 L. T. 308; 21 W. R. 168. Bequest of fund to be applied "in or about restoring, altering and enlarging and improving the church, parsonage house and schools." An inquiry was directed as to which of the three specified objects were erected on land already in mortmain and as to the sums required. The legacy to prevail to that amount. Champney v. Davey, 11 Ch. D. 949; 48 L. J., Ch. 268; 40 L. T. 189; 27 W. R. 390. Lease of Dissenting Chapel-Non-Inrolment of.]-By a lease to six persons described as trustees, a building used as a dissenting chapel, though not so described, was demised for ninety-nine years, with a covenant for renewal, at the yearly rent of 1s. The lease reserved to the lessors a right of access to their pews, but was not inrolled. New trustees of the chapel had been appointed under the provisions of 13 & 14 Vict. c. 28. Shortly before the expiration of the term the trustees served the reversioner with a notice for renewal. At that time no rent had been paid for above twenty years, but some of the arrears were then paid to and accepted by the reversioner. The reversioner refused to renew the lease. Five years afterwards he brought an action against the trustees to recover possession of the building: -Held, that the lease was a grant for charitable purposes, and was void under the Mortmain Act (9 Geo. 2, c. 36). Bunting v. Sargent, 13 Ch. D. 330; 49 L. J., Ch. 109; 41 L. T. 643; 28 W. R. 123. Semble, if the lease had contained a power for the trustees to sell the chapel and apply the money to other purposes, it would still have been a grant for charitable purposes within the meaning of the Mortmain Act. Ib. Held, also, that the plaintiff's right of action was not extinguished under sect. 34 of the Statute of Limitations (3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 27). Ib. Gift over to Civil Purposes-Reservation.] -An owner of land having, at his own expense, built a chapel, which was used for the purpose of public worship, and the congregation having subscribed money for the purpose of enlarging and improving the same, he, in consideration that the money so subscribed should be expended for that purpose, demised the premises by lease for twentythree years, reserving a pepper-corn rent during his life, and 107. per annum after his death. A declaration of trust was afterwards executed by some of the lessees, declaring that they would hold the premises in trust for the congregation assembling at the chapel; and that in case the public worship should be there discontinued, then, that they would assign the premises to civil purposes:Held, that this was a conveyance for the benefit of a charitable use, and therefore void within 9 Geo. 2, c. 36, s. 1. Doe d. Wellard v. Hawthorn, 2 B. & A. 96. Held, also, that neither the sum agreed to be expended on the premises, nor the rent reserved at the death of the lessor, could be considered a full consideration paid for the lease, so as to bring the case within sect. 2. Ib. Held, also, that the declaration of trust, although executed only by some out of the several lessees, was evidence against all of the purposes for which the lease was granted. Ib. Soup Kitchen and Cottage Hospital.]—A testator directed his trustees to set apart out of such part of his estate as should be pure personalty and applicable by law for charitable purposes, a sum of money to be applied in the establishment of a soup kitchen and cottage hospital, and providing the latter with four beds and necessary appliances, and a further sum to be applied in establishing an independent chapel at A. Each gift was directed to be made in such manner as not to violate the Mortmain Acts. The trustees were not seised of any property already in mort main : -Held, by Hall, V.-C., and by the Court of Appeal, that the bequest for the soup kitchen and cottage hospital was valid. Jackson, In re, Briscoe v. Jackson, 51 L. J., Ch. 464; 46 L. T. 355-C. A. Reversing, 50 L. J., Ch. 597; 45 L. T. 8. Held by the Court of Appeal, reversing decision of Hall, V. C., that the bequest for estab lishing a chapel necessarily implied the purchase of land by the trustees, and was also valid. 1b. ing wine and bread for the sick poor of Unnsworth, with a gift of the residue to the executor in trust for B.:-Held, that the first purpose of To Maintain Window in Church.]-A gift of the gift being invalid, the whole of the income the proceeds of personal estate in perpetuity to was applicable to the charity; and that the sum a minister and churchwardens, for the mainten- should be paid to the official charity trustee to ance and repair of an existing ornamental win-invest and pay the income to the incumbent of dow, and a monument in the parish church, is Unnsworth for the time being to be applied by good, as being for the maintenance of the fabric him for the sick poor of the parish, as in the will of the church, and within the scope of 43 Eliz. directed; the executor's costs not to be allowed c. 4. Hoare v. Osborne, 1 L. R., Eq. 585; 35 out of the fund, though he might take it out of L. J.. Ch. 345; 12 Jur., N. S. 243; 14 L. T. 9; the residue. Birkett, In re, 9 Ch. D. 576; 47 14 W. R. 383. L. J., Ch. 846; 39 L. T. 418; 27 W. R. 164. Secus, as to the like gift for the repair of a vault outside the church. Ib. To Repair Tombstones and Pay over Surplus.] -An uncle devised and bequeathed all his estate and effects upon trust for his niece for her life; and after her death he bequeathed legacies, and directed that all the residue of his estate should be divided as a mixed fund amongst three residuary legatees. He then desired that his executors should pay to the trustees of a charity 1,000l. stock, for the following use, namely," to pay the required amount for painting and keeping in repair" the gravestone of himself and his niece for a certain day (his birthday) yearly, if required, and to pay the balance that may remain for the purposes of the charity-Held, that the trust to keep in repair the gravestone was honorary only; and hence, though the sum which would be required for that purpose was uncertain in amount, the uncertainty did not render void the gift of the residue of the 1,000l. stock. Hunter v. Bullock, 14 L. R., Eq. 45; 41 L. J., Ch. 637; 26 L. T. 349; 20 W. R. 460. A testator gave 600l. to be invested, and directed that the income should be applied in keeping in repair the graves of himself and certain relatives in the churchyards of G. and S., and that any surplus that might remain thereafter should be given away by the executrix of his will every year, on his birthday, to poor pious members of the Methodist Society resident in G. above the age of fifty-Held, that the trust to keep in repair the graves was honorary only, and that there was a good charitable gift of the whole sum for the benefit of the persons indicated by the testator discharged from the obligation to keep in repair the graves. Dawson v. Small, 18 L. R., Eq. 114; 43 L. J., Ch. 406; 30 L. T. 252; 22 W. R. 514. Affirmed, 9 L. R., Ch. 651. A testator gave a fund to trustees upon trust to apply the income in keeping in repair certain tombs, and directed them to accumulate the surplus income from time to time till it amounted to 251. and upwards, and when that took place to pay over in equal shares to the incumbents of two parishes, for the benefit of poor persons, such sum as would reduce the accumulations to 201.: -Held, that the invalidity of the trust for the repair of the tombs did not render the whole gift void, but that, the first object having failed, the will must be read as if nothing was applicable to the repair of the tombs, and that the whole fund went to the incumbents. Williams, In re, 5 Ch. D. 735; 47 L. J., Ch. 92; 36 L. T. 939; 25 W. R. 689. Bequest to the incumbent for the time being of Unnsworth of 500l., the income to be applied, when necessary, in keeping in repair the grave and the railing and tombstone of A., and the remainder of such income to be applied in provid Upon Conditions.]-A grant by deed, executed and enrolled pursuant to the Statute of Mortmain, of lands to trustees and their heirs, to the use of one of them, his heirs and assigns, upon condition that he, his heirs and assigns, should, from time to time, repair a vault and tomb, standing upon part of the lands; and, if need be, rebuild it, and permit the same to be used as a family vault for the grantor and any of her family; and in default thereof, then over to the other trustee, his heirs and assigns, is not within the words of the statute, which prohibit the granting of land to charitable uses, unless the deed is without any condition or reservation for the benefit of the grantor, or any person claiming under him. Doe d. Thompson v. Pitcher, 3 M. & S. 407; 2 Marsh. 61; 6 Taunt. 359. Gift for Purpose of Hiring Rooms.]-A gift of personalty to be employed in temporarily hiring rooms for the reception of poor persons is not contrary to the policy of the Mortmain Act. Robson, In re, Emley v. Davidson, 45 L. T. 418 -C. A. Trust to Erect and Build Almshouses. ]-Bequest of 1,000l. to a city company, upon trust, "when a proper site can be obtained for that purpose," to erect and build eight almshouses, with a declaration by the testator that he had made this bequest "under the anxious hope that some other benevolent person would hereafter sufficiently endow the said almshouses : "—Held, not to be void under the Mortmain Act, as there was a sufficient indication on the face of the gift to exclude the application of the legacy in the acquisition of land; and that the company were entitled to the money, upon satisfying the court that they had a suitable site upon which the almshouses could be erected. White's Trusts, In re, 51 L. J., Ch. 830; 47 L. T. 248; 30 W. R. 837. A lady, "feeling that she was doing right in returning her money in charity to God who gave it," bequeathed all her residuary personal estate to be applied in building almshouses "when land should be given for the purpose":-Held, to be a good charitable gift. Chamberlayne v. Brockett, 8 L. R., Ch. 206; 42 L. J., Ch. 368; 28 L. T. 248; 21 W. R. 299. Reversing 41 L. J., Ch. 789; 27 L. T. 92; 20 W. R. 739. To pay off Charges on Almshouse.]—A testatrix bequeathed stock to trustees to be applied “for or towards payment of all or any debt or debts, dues, demands, charges, or claims whatsoever, which may be owing or chargeable upon or in any manner claimable against" an almshouse situated upon land in mortmain :-Held, that the bequest was void under the Statute of Mortmain (9 Geo. 2, c. 36), as in substance a gift of stock to be laid out or disposed of in the purchase of a charge or incumbrance affecting land in mortmain. Lynall's Trusts, In re, 12 Ch. D. 211; 48 L. J., Ch. 684; 28 W. R. 146. To establish Hospital.]-A lady, during her illness, gave a sum of money to trustees to establish a fever hospital. The money was invested in their names, and they executed a trust deed declaring that they held the money for the purpose of establishing (after the decease of the donor) a fever hospital. The donor, who knew nothing of the execution of the deed, died a fortnight after giving the money :-Held, that the gift came within 9 Geo. 2, c. 36, and was void. Hawkins v. Allen, 10 L. R., Eq. 246; 40 L. J., C. H. 23; 23 L. T. 465; 18 W. R. 748. Dispensary.]-A gift of money by will to a charity to be expended in building will be void unless it is distinctly provided that no part of it is to be expended in the purchase of land, or it is clearly expressed that the new building is to be on land already in mortmain. Cox, In re, Cor v. Davie, 7 Ch. D. 204; 47 L. J., Ch. 72; 37 L. T. 457; 26 W. R. 74. A bequest to a corporation of 3.0007. consols, of which 1,0007. was to be expended in the erection of a dispensary which is so urgently needed there," and the remaining 2,000l. to be invested as 66 an endowment fund for the dispensary: "-Held, void under 9 Geo. 2, c. 36 (the Mortmain Act), although the corporation held land in mortmain, which was available for the purposes of the bequest. Ib. the impure personalty) to a gift to charities exempt from the Mortmain Act, to be selected by the trustees, and therefore a valid gift, Lewis v. Allenby, 10 L. R., Eq. 668; 18 W. R. 1127. A testator gave a legacy to the mayor of Dublin for such objects as he should deem most deserving, and gave the residue of his property to his trustees for such objects as they should consider most deserving:-Held, that the legacies were not charitable, and not given to the mayor or the trustees for their own benefit, and therefore void. Harris v. Du Pasquier, 26 L. T. 689 ; 20 W. R. 688. These gifts were to take effect after the death or marriage of the testator's wife :-Held, no life estate by implication to the widow. Ib. A bequest of pure personalty to an existing charity, the application of the funds of which rests in the absolute discretion of the trustees is good, although some of the objects of the charity may involve the acquisition of land. Wilkinson v. Barber, 14 L. R., Eq. 96; 41 L. J., Ch. 721; 26 L. T. 937; 20 W. R. 763. The legacy duty on a charitable legacy, given free of duty, cannot be paid out of impure personalty. Ib. Next of kin appearing in opposition to a charitable bequest, and failing, are not entitled to costs as between solicitor and client. Ib. "For the Use of the Town."]-A legacy of 1,000l. "for the use or benefit of a borough town, or of the inhabitants, or of the institutions in the borough," is a good charitable gift. Wrexham (Mayor, &c.) v. Tamplin, 28 L. T. 761; 21 W. R. 768. Att. Schools.]-A gift by will of money for the Trust in favour of Parish.]-A trust of prosupport or founding of a school does not neces-perty in favour of a parish or the parishioners of sarily imply that the money is to be "laid out or a parish for ever can only be upheld on the disposed of in the purchase of any lands, tene- ground of its being a charitable trust. ments, or hereditaments," so as to render the Gen. v. Webster, 20 L. R. Eq. 483; 44 L. J., Ch. gift void under the Mortmain Act. Hedgman, | 766. In re, Morley v. Croxon, 8 Ch. D. 156; 26 W. R. 674. A testator bequeathed a sum of money to trustees to be applied by them in "supporting or founding" free or ragged schools for poor children in a particular parish. For some years prior to the date of the will and down to the testator's death there existed in the parish a school for the children of the poorest inhabitants, the testator being its principal supporter. It was held in a hired room, the rent of which was paid by the testator, who also paid the teacher's salary :Held, reading the will as creating an alternative trust, a good charitable gift. Ib. To be selected-Discretion as to objects of.]— A testatrix gave legacies to several charitable institutions, and then gave her residuary personal estate "to and amongst the different institutions, or to any other religious institution or purposes as A. and B. might think proper: "-Held, that the bequest of the residue was a good charitable gift, | and not void for uncertainty. Wilkinson v. Lindgren, 5 L. R., Ch. 570; 39 L. J., Ch. 722; 23 L. T. 375; 18 W. R. 961. In 1585 property was conveyed to two persons upon a secret trust for a London parish. The income of the property was afterwards received by the churchwardens and applied to charitable purposes :-Held, that the property was subject to a charitable trust. Ib. Although parishioners may hold an advowson for their general benefit and nominate their vicar, this is an exception to the general law, and other property held upon trust for a parish or parishioner is charity property. Ib. Poor Descendants of certain Person.]-A testator gave the residue of his real and personal estate to trustees for investment in government securities in their joint names, and directed the interest from time to time to be given to such of the lineal descendants of W. as might severally need it; and the trustees were to make provision for insuring a continuance of the trust at their decease :-Held, that the gift was charitable. Gillam v. Taylor, 16 L. R., Eq. 581; 42 L. J., Ch. 674 ; 28 L. T. 833; 21 W. R. 823. To Society for Prevention of Cruelty to AniA bequest of residue of personal estate (which mals.]-A gift to the Society for the Prevention included impure personalty) to trustees, upon of Cruelty to Animals, to be applied as the comtrust to divide the same among such charities inmittee should "think best towards the establishEngland as they in their sole and uncontrolled ment in the neighbourhood of London and discretion shall think proper, is equivalent (as to Westminster of slaughter-houses away from the densely-populated places in which they are now | scheme for its application; and that the corposituated, and for the relief of and protection from ration would have no costs up to judgment. 1b. cruelty to the animals taken to be slaughtered," is void, as being within the Statute of Mortmain. Tatham v. Drummond, 4 De G., J. & S. 484. Friendly Society.]—A friendly society is not a charitable institution. Clark, In re, 1 Ch. D. 497; 45 L. J., Ch. 194; 24 W. R. 233, Poor Rates.]-A pauper being in custody for having left his wife and children chargeable to the parish for several years, executed an indenture, reciting "that the present as well as former parish officers had expended money in maintaining his wife and children, and that he had agreed to convey to the parish officers certain lands," and he thereby conveyed them to trustees for the churchwardens and overseers of the poor, and the inhabitants of the parish, to the intent that the rents and profits might be applied to their use and benefit, in aid of the poor rates :— Held, that this was a conveyance for the benefit of a charitable use, requiring inrolment, pursuant to 9 Geo. 2, c. 36, s. 1, and not a conveyance for a valuable consideration actually paid, within sect. 2; and that a person who had been a party to the deed conveying the property was not estopped from taking advantage of this objection. Doe d. Preece v. Howells, 2 B. & Ad. 744. Objects of, how ascertained-Discretion as to.]-A testator directed that a fund of personalty over which he had a general power of appointment should, unless otherwise specifically disposed of by a codicil, become part of his residuary estate. By a codicil he gave out of this fund various charitable legacies, and directed that the residue of the fund should be given by his executors to the charitable institutions to which he should by any future codicil give the same, "and in default of any such gift, then to be distributed by my executors at their discretion." He made no subsequent codicil :-Held, that the ultimate trust in the codicil was that the residue should be distributed by the executors among charitable institutions at their discretion, and that a trust in favour of charity was created. Pocock v. Att.-Gen., 3 Ch. D. 342; 46 L. J., Ch. 495; 35 L. T. 575; 25 W. R. 277. A testatrix gave legacies to the Church Pastoral Aid Society in England, and the Church Pastoral Aid Society in Ireland. There was no society of that name in Ireland, but there was a society called the Additional Curates Fund Society for Ireland, which had been altered to the Spiritual Aid Society for Ireland, with precisely the same objects as the Church Pastoral Aid Society in England:-Held, that she having a charity having the particular objects fulfilled by this society, it was entitled to the fund, the attorney-general not objecting. Maguire, In re, 9 L. R., Eq., 632; 39 L. J., Ch. 710; 18 W. R. 623. B. gave a legacy to the Victoria Hospital. Two charities claimed it, one the City of London Hospital for Diseases of the Chest, Victoria Park, to which the testator had been a subscriber, and of which he was a life governor, and which he used to speak of as the Victoria Hospital; and the other the Victoria Hospital for Sick Children, Chelsea, with which he never had any connection:-Held, that the former hospital was the one intended. Briscoe, In re, 26 L. T. 149; 20 W. R. 355. Appeal compromised, ib. 504. Antecedent to Statute of Charitable Uses-indicated her intention to give this legacy to Deed of Feoffment "Charitable" not equivalent to "Benevolent."]-In an action against a corporation to have certain charitable trusts of a deed of feoffment made by the corporation in the year 1599 (by which the feoffees were granted "certain lands upon the special trust and confidence that they should permit and suffer the corporation to have and enjoy the premises, and to receive the rent thereof, for and towards the repairing of the church and conduits of the town, the relief of the poor, the maintenance of the bulwarks and fortifications, and other charitable, needful and necessary uses for the town, as to the corporation should seem meet ") carried into effect, and the lands and property subject thereto ascertained and distinguished, and to have a scheme established for the regulation of the A testatrix bequeathed a legacy to "The charity-Held, that "charitable was not equi- Society for the Propagation of the Gospel among valent to "benevolent," but meant the purposes the Jews." There were two societies, namely, enumerated in the statute of 1601 (43 Eliz. c. 4)," The London Society for Promoting Christianity or those analogous thereto; and that in this case the four purposes specifically mentioned in the deed, and other charitable, needful and necessary uses," were all clearly "charitable" within the meaning of the act. Att.-Gen. v. Dartmouth (Mayor), 48 L. T. 933. That the corporation was not at liberty to apply the rents to purposes of general utility for the town, because those purposes were not ejusdem generis with those specifically mentioned in the deed of feoffment. Ib. That the deed was not sufficiently ambiguous to entitle the corporation to bring in contemporaneous or subsequent usage to explain its meaning. Ib. That the statute 1 Edw. 6, c. 14, which vested lands held in superstitious uses in the Crown, had no application to this case, to support the plea advanced under it by the corporation; and that as charitable trusts were disclosed by the deed of 1599, there must be the usual inquiry as to the property comprised in the deed, and a among the Jews," and "The British Society for the Propagation of the Gospel among the Jews: "-Held, that evidence of intention was admissible; and the fact that the testatrix had on one occasion subscribed to the London Society, was sufficient to turn the scale in its favour. Fearn's Will, In re, 27 W. R. 392. Under a gift by will to the Kent County Hospital, and there being no hospital having precisely that name :-Held, that a general hospital must be presumed to have been intended, and that the Kent County Ophthalmic Hospital could not take the legacy, and that it must be divided between two hospitals, which together supplied the place of a general county hospital. Alchin, In re, Furley, Ex parte, Romney (Earl), Ex parte, 14 L. R., Eq. 230; 26 L. T. 763, 824. A legacy was given "to the treasurer for the time being of the fund for the relief of the widows and orphans of the clergy of the diocese of Worcester, to be applied by him for the benefit of that charity." There were two |