Parsons. This testator does not limit his bequest to 50001. but Atty.-gen. v. whatever his property should be at the time of his death, 8 Vez. 186. as much as should be wanted for this purpose was to be given to it; and when the residue is said to be 20,0001, no construction is to be put upon this will from the amount of it; that must not have been put upon it if the testator had spent 14,000l. of that sum, or had by a subsequent codicil given more or less to legatees. The amount of the legacy is unascertained, except according to the actual demand of the charity to which it was to be applied, and the casual amount at the death of the testator cannot be a ground of construction, which must be the same as if the residue was only 50001, and cannot depend upon the accidents. I take this school to be a voluntary society, existing purely by voluntary engagements; and then if they happen to have land to be furnished, that is not land at this moment in mortmain in the sense of the statute.* It seems preposterous certainly that a man should give 20,000l. to purchase land worth no more than 5,000l. but the difficulty with reference to that is, that I make the declaration upon the accident that the amount is 20,0001. whereas the construction ought to be the same as if he had spent 15,000l. of that sum. But supposing there might possibly be a surplus beyond what was necessary for the purposes to be accomplished in these alms-houses, yet upon this will it is altogether uncertain, whether there would or would not be any residue beyond what was to be employed in the alms-houses, and if what is given is to be employed in buildings contrary to the act, all the cases are uniform; that if the minister is to be employed * In the course of the argument a doubt was suggested, whether the Committee of this charity had any land in mortinain, and it was said the charity was supported by voluntary contributions, not by any per manent endowment. 1 employed in the chapel, or the poor persons are to live in the alms-houses to be built contrary to the act, that which would have been good if it had stood alone, will be bad if the purpose is to be employed in those buildings which the statute will not allow to be erected, Upon the whole will, this would be in whatever terms expressed, whether of condition or not, only a declaration of the trust upon which they are to take, if they do take. By the direction for management the orphan committee are out of that residue, comprehending more if necessary than 5,000l. or less certainly, if less would be sufficient, to do the acts pointed out; among which, is to afford the same medical assistance to the alms-houses as to the school; and he recommends them, which would be imperative upon them, to establish a chaplain. Malim v.Keigh- It is a bequest of a residue to be laid out, in the first instance, in land; and if all should not be exhausted, as it could not be consistently with his scheme, to be laid out upon these purposes affording medical assistance, and for a chaplain in the alms-houses; and all beyond that, if well given, is uncertainly given; and if the primary gift fails, the secondary gift being totally uncertain and fluctuating from time to time, the whole must fail. ley. @Vez. 833, 529. Chapman v. On the other ground there is as much vanity as charity in this. He did not choose this monument to be erected to his memory, unless he should be considered benefactor of the school as well as the hospital. He meant, if the orphan committee could take the management of the alms-houses, then so much should be for the school; but if they could not, then the trustees substituted could build the alms-houses and school also. But if it cannot be distinguished how much was for the alms-houses, and how much for the school, it is very difficult to divide it and make it good for part, and not for the rest. Upon the whole, therefore, the decree was affirmed. SECTION SECTION IX. Of Misnaming, Uncertainty, and Want of Objects. Uncertainty, and Want of Objects. 49. 4 2 Vezey, 426. Notwithstanding the ancient rule, that uncertainty Misnaming, makes void the grant, yet the misnaming and uncertainty of expression, in a bequest to a charity, has been always guarded by the legislature and by the court, as may appear by the statute 14 Eliz. c. 14 and by the following Finch, of Law, decisions. But it may be proper to observe here, that the usual course of application to the court to establish charities, is by bill of information in the name of the Attorney-general; and though there should be any mistake in the circumstance of laying it, yet if it appears there is a charity, and the right appears in the whole cause, that information cannot be dismissed, but a decree must be made to establish that charity. This doctrine had been frequently laid down, and allowed; because it is considered as a proceeding by an officer of the crown; and as the king is pater patriæ, the information therefore must not be dismissed: so that although the relator has mistaken his title, yet if in the cause a title comes out for him and his successors, he must have that title established. This is the doctrine maintained by the Court of Chancery in all charity cases; but it will be found to go much further than this; for in all cases of uncertainty, and even of want of objects, either from there not being found any to take the benefit of the intended bounty, or where there have been objects, and they are all satisfied or gone, the court will still preserve the gift for charitable purposes, cy pres, as near as possible to the donor's intention for what has once vested in charity, never reverts to the donor or his heirs, but will be disposed of by the king, by his sign manual, or by the court, according to a scheme to be submitted to the master's investigation for some other charity. And where devises have been held to be void on account of misnaming a drews,ante 147. charity, they have been maintained as appointments in equity, under 43 Eliz. c. 4. Finch, 221. The following case arose some years before the date of this act, on perhaps the most extraordinary will that ever appeared in the legal annals of this kingdom. Richard Norton, of Southwick, in Hampshire, esq. died in 1732, leaving a will dated in June, 1714, (and several codicils and testamentary schedules), wherein after his debts, &c. should be punctually discharged, he devised all his real and personal estates whatsoever in the county of Southampton, with every thing that he did hold, possess, or enjoy, or in any manner whatsoever it be belonging to the same real and personal estates, to the poor, hungry and thirsty, naked and strangers, sick and wounded, and prisoners, and to and for no other use whatsoever; and did thereby make, constitute, and appoint the poor abovesaid to be his general and absolute heir and heirs to the end of the world. And he says, “I do presume to make, constitute, and appoint, all and 66 every person and persons, that do, shall, or may "make or compose, or are to be the supreme legislature "of Great Britain in parliament assembled, to be my "executors. And if I have presumed too high, and it "be refused, then I beseech the archbishops, together "with the bishops of Great Britain or of England, for “the time being, and their successors, to be my exe"cutors:" any five of them, whereof the archbishop of Canterbury Canterbury to be one, by any writing under their hands to act, order, do, and fully perform and execute my true meaning and intent therein before declared, to the end of the world" And I do most humbly beg of them "all to be zealous advocates for the poor as aforesaid, to "the legislature of Great Britain: and if, at the time of my death, the supreme legislature should not be sitting, "then that any five of them the said bishops, &c.whereof "the said archbishop to be one, would immediately be "pleased to take care provisionally of all matters therein "contained, and do all acts until the next parliament "shall meet and be held." The consideration of so extraordinary a will necessarily came under the investigation and care of the legislature; and to the end that its validity, as far as it related to his personal estate, might be examined and determined in the ecclesiastical court, and that fit persons might be appointed to institute, prosecute, and defend all suits concerning the same, as far as the same relate to his personal estate, a private act was passed, 6 Geo. II. c. 32. empowering three persons named in the act, to sue for administration, with power to the ecclesiastical court to appoint others in case of death: and it was declared that the act should not give greater force to the said will, than it had before. And in 1737, three years after the last mortmain act, 10Geo.lI. c.37. another act was passed, to prevent the statute of limita tions (21 Ja. I.) from being pleaded by any persons claiming under this will, against any title which Thomas Norton, esq. had to the manor of Old Alresford, in Southampton, by indenture of settlement, or the rents or profits thereof. I have not been able to learn what steps have since been taken, or how the estates are applied; but it has been already shewn, that bequests to the poor indefinitely, means |