Dictionary    Maps    Thesaurus    Translate    Advanced >   


Tip: Click Thesaurus above for synonyms. Also, follow synonym links within the dictionary to find definitions from other sources.

1. WordNet® 3.0 (2006)
legate
    n 1: a member of a legation [syn: legate, official emissary]

2. The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48
Legate \Leg"ate\ (l[e^]g"[asl]t), n. [OE. legat, L. legatus, fr.
   legare to send with a commission or charge, to depute, fr.
   lex, legis, law: cf. F. l['e]gat, It. legato. See Legal.]
   1. An ambassador or envoy.
      [1913 Webster]

   2. An ecclesiastic representing the pope and invested with
      the authority of the Holy See.
      [1913 Webster]

   Note: Legates are of three kinds: (a) Legates a latere, now
         always cardinals. They are called ordinary or
         extraordinary legates, the former governing provinces,
         and the latter class being sent to foreign countries on
         extraordinary occasions. (b) Legati missi, who
         correspond to the ambassadors of temporal governments.
         (c) Legati nati, or legates by virtue of their
         office, as the archbishops of Salzburg and Prague.
         [1913 Webster]

   3. (Rom. Hist.)
      (a) An official assistant given to a general or to the
          governor of a province.
      (b) Under the emperors, a governor sent to a province.
          [1913 Webster]

3. Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Ed (1856)
LEGATES. Legates are extraordinary ambassadors sent by the pope to catholic 
countries to represent him, and to exercise his jurisdiction. They are 
distinguished from the ambassadors of the pope who are sent to other powers. 
     2. The canonists divide them into three kinds, namely: 1. Legates A 
latere. 2. Legati missi. 3. Legati nati. 
     3.-1. Legates latere hold the first rank among those who are honored 
by a legation; they are always chosen from the college of cardinals, and are 
called a latere, in imitation of the magistrates of ancient Rome, who were 
taken from the court, or side of the emperor. 
     4.-2. The legati missi are simple envoys. 
     5.-3. The legati nati, are those who are entitled to be legates by 
birth. 



4. Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Revised 6th Ed (1856)
LEGATEE. A legatee is a person to whom a legacy is given by a last will and 
testament. 
     2. It is proposed to consider, 1. Who may be a legatee. 2. Under what 
description legatees may take. 
     3.-1. Who may be a legatee. In general, every person may be a 
legatee. 2 Bl. Com. 512. But a person civilly dead cannot take a legacy. 
     II. Under what description legatees may take. 
     4.-1. Of legacies to legitimate children. 1. When it appears from 
express declaration, or a clear inference arising upon the face of the will, 
that a testator in giving a legacy to a class of individuals generally, 
intended to apply the terms used by him to such persons only as answered the 
description at the date of the instrument, those individuals alone will be 
entitled, although if no such intention had been expressed, or appeared in 
the will, every person failing within that class at the testator's death, 
would have been included in the terms of the bequest. 1 Meriv. 320; and see 
3 Ves. 611; Id. 609; 15 Ves. 363; Ambl. 397; 2 Cox, 291; 4 Bro. C. C. 55; 3 
Bro. C. C. 148; 2 Cox, 384. 
     5.-2. Where a legacy is given to a class of individuals, as to 
children, in general terms, and no period is appointed for the distribution 
of it, the legacy is due at the death of the testator; the payment of it 
being merely postponed to the end of a year after that event, for the 
convenience of the executor or administrator in administering the assets. 
The rights of the legatees are finally settled, and determined at the 
testator's decease. 1 Ball & B. 459; 2 Murph. 178. Upon this principal, is 
founded the well established rule that children in existence at that period, 
or legally considered so to be, are alone entitled to participate in the 
bequest. 1 Bro. C. C. 532, n.; 2 Bro. C. C. 658; 2 Cox, 190.; 1 Dick. 344; 
14 Ves. 576; 1 Ves. jr. 405; 1 Cox, 68; 3 Bro. C. C. 391; Amb. 448; 1 Ves. 
sen. 485; 5 Binn. 607. 
     6.-3. A child in ventre sa mere takes a share in a fund bequeathed to 
children, under the general description of "children," or of "children 
living at the testator's death." 1 Ves. sen. 85; and see 1 P. Wms. 244, 341; 
2 Bro. C. C. 63; 1 Salk. 229; 2 Cox, 425; 5 Serg. & Rawle, 38. See tit. In 
ventre sa mere. 
     7.-4. When legacies are given to a class of individuals, generally, 
payable at a future period, as to the children of B, when the youngest shall 
attain the age of twenty-one, or to be divided among them upon the death of 
C; any child who can entitle itself under the description, at the time when 
the fund is to be divided, may claim a share, viz: as well children living 
at the period of distribution, although not born till after the testator's 
death, as those born before, and living at the happening of that event. 1 
Supp. to Ves. jr. 115, note 3, to Hill v. Chapman; 2 Supp. to Ves. jr. 157, 
note 1, to Lincoln v. Pelham. This general rule may be divided into two 
branches. First,  when the division of the fund is postponed until a child 
or children attain a particular age; as, when a legacy is given to the 
children of A, at the age of twenty-one; in that case, so soon as the eldest 
arrives at that period, the fund is distributable among so many as are in 
existence at that time; and no child born afterwards can be admitted to a 
share, because the period of division fixes the number of legatees. 
Distribution is then made, and nothing remains for future partition. 1 Ball 
& Beat. 459; 3 Bro. C. C. 402; 5 Binn. 607; 2 Ves. jr. 690; 3 Ves. 730; 3 
Bro. C. C. 352, ed. by Belt; 14 Ves. 256; 6 Ves. 345; 10 Ves. 152; 11 Ves. 
238. Second, when the distribution of the fund is deferred during the life 
of a person in esse. In these cases, when the enjoyment of the thing given, 
is by the testator's express declaration not to be immediate by those, among 
whom it is to be finally divided, but is postponed to a particular period, 
as the death of A, then the children or individuals who answer the general 
description at that time, when distribution is to be made, are entitled to 
take, in exclusion of those afterwards coming in esse. 1 Ves. sen. 111; 1 
Bro. C. C. 386; Id. 530; Id. 582; Id. 537; 1 Atk. 509; 2 Atk. 329; 5 Ves. 
136; 3 Bro. C. C. 417; 1 Cox, 327; 8 Ves. 375; 15 Ves. 122; 1 Madd. R. 290; 
1 Ball & Beat. 449. 
     8.-5. The word "children" does not, ordinarily and properly speaking, 
comprehend grandchildren or issue generally; these are included in that term 
only in two cases, namely, 1. From necessity, which occurs where the will 
would remain inoperative unless the sense of the word "children" were 
extended beyond its natural import; and, 2. Where the testator has shown by 
other words, that he did not intend to use the term children in its proper 
and actual meaning, but in a more extended sense. 1 Supp. to Ves. jr. 202, 
note 2, to Bristow v. Ward. In the following cases, the word children was 
extended beyond its natural import from necessity. 6 Rep. 16; 10 Ves. 201; 2 
Desaus. R. 123, in note. The following are instances where by using the 
words children and issue, indiscriminately, the testator showed his 
intention to use the former term in the sense of issue so as to entitle 
grandchildren, &c. to take. 1 Ves. sen. 196; S. C. Ambl. 555; 3 Ves. 258; 3 
Ves. & Bea. 68; 4 Ves. 437; 2 Supp. to Ves. jr. 158. There is another class 
of cases wherein it was determined that grandchildren, &c. were not included 
in the word children. 2 Vern. 107; 4 Ves. 692; 10 Ves. 195; 3 Ves. & Bea. 
59; see 2 Desauss. 308. 
     9.-2. Of legacies to natural children. 1. Natural children unborn at 
the date of the will, cannot take under a bequest to the children generally, 
or to the illegitimate children of A B by Mary C; because a natural child 
cannot take as the issue of a particular person, until it has acquired the 
reputation of being the child of that person, which cannot be before its 
birth. Co, Litt. 3, b. 
    10.-2. Natural children, unborn at the date of the will and described 
as children of the testator or another man, to be born of a particular 
woman, cannot take under such a description. 1 Peere, Wms. 529; 18 Ves. 288. 
    11.-3. A legacy to an illegitimate child in ventre sa mere, described 
as the child of the testator or of another man, will fail, since whether the 
testator or such person were or were not in truth the father, is a fact 
which can only be ascertained by evidence that public policy forbids to be 
admitted. 1 Meriv. 141 to 152. 
    12.-4. A child in ventre sa mere described merely as a child with 
which the mother is enceinte, without mentioning its putative father; or if 
the testator express a belief that the child is his own, and provide for it 
under that impression, regardless of the chance of being mistaken; then the 
child will in the first place be capable of taking and in the second, as 
presumed, be also, entitled in consequence of the testator's intent to 
provide for it, whether he be the father or not. 1 Meriv. 148, 152. 
    13.-5. Natural children in existence, having acquired by reputation 
the name and character of children of a particular person, prior to the date 
of the will, are capable of taking under the name of children. 1 P. Wms. 
529; 1 Ves. & Bea. 467. But the term child, son, issue, and every other word 
of that species, is to be considered as prima facie to mean legitimate 
child, son, or issue. Id. 
    14.-6. Whether such children take or not depends upon the evidence of 
the testator's intention, manifested by the will, to include them in the 
term children; these cases are instances where the evidence of such 
intention was deemed insufficient. 5 Ves. 530; 1 Ves. & Bea. 454; 6 Ves. 43, 
48; 1 Ves. & Bea. 4619; and see 1 Ves. & Bea. 456; 2 East, 530, 542. In the 
following, the evidence of intention was held to be sufficient. 1 Ves. & 
Bea. 469; Blundell v. Dunn, cited in 1 Madd. 433; Beachcroft v. Beachcroft, 
cited in 1 Madd. 430; 2 Meriv. 419. 
    15.-3. Of legacies of personal estate to a man and his heirs. 1. A 
legacy to A and his heirs, is an absolute legacy to A, and the whole 
interest of the money vests in him for his use. 4 Mad. 361. But when no 
property in the bequest is given to A, and the money is bequeathed to his 
heirs, or to him with a limitation to his heirs, if he die before the 
testator, and the contingency happens, then if there be nothing in the will 
showing the sense in which the testator made use of the word heirs, the next 
of kin of A, are entitled to claim under the description, as the only 
persons appointed by law to succeed to personal estate. 5 Ves. 403; 4 Ves. 
649; 1 Jac. & Walk. 388. 
    16.-2. A bequest to the heirs of an individual, without addition or 
explanation, will belong to the next of kin; the rule, however, is subject 
to, alteration by the intention of the testator. If then the contents of the 
will show, that by the word heirs the testator meant other persons than the 
next of kin, those persons will be entitled. Ambl. 273; 1 P. Wms. 432; 
Forrest, 56; 2 Atk. 89; See, also, 1 Ves. jr. 145; 4 Madd. 361; 14 Ves. 488; 
1 Car. Law R. 484. 
    17.-4. Legacies to issue. 1. The term issue, is of very extensive 
import, and when used as a word of purchase, and unconfined by any 
indication of intention, will comprise all persons who can claim as 
descendants from or through the person to whose issue the bequest is made; 
and in order to restrain the legal sense of the term, a clear intention must 
appear upon the will. 3 Ves. 257; Id. 421; 1 Meriv. 434; 13 Ves. 344. 
    18.-2. Where it appears clearly to be a testator's meaning to provide 
for a class of individuals living at the date of his will, and he provides 
against a lapse by the death of any of them in his lifetime, by the 
substitution of their issue; in such case, although the word will include 
all the descendants of the designated legatees, yet if any person who would 
have answered the description of an original legatee when the will was made, 
be then dead, leaving issue, that issue will be excluded, because the issue 
of those individuals only who were capable of taking original shares, at the 
date of the will, were intended to take by substitution; so that as the 
person who was dead when the will was made, could never have taken an 
original share, there is nothing for his issue to take in his place. 1 
Meriv. 320. 
    19.-3. When it can be collected from the will that a testator in using 
the word issue, did not intend it should be understood in its common 
acceptation, the import of it will be confined to the persons whom it was 
intended to comprehend. 7 Ires. 531; 3 Ves. 383; 7 Ves. 522; 1 Ves. jr. 143. 
    20.-5. Of legacies to relations. 1. Under a bequest to relations, none 
are entitled but those, who in the case of intestacy, could have claimed 
under the statute of distribution. Forrest. 251; 4 Bro. C. C. 207; 1 Bro. C. 
C. 31; 3 Bro. C. C. 234; 5 Ves. 529; Ambl. 507; Dick. 380; 1 P. Wms. 327; 2 
Ves. sen. 527; 19 Ves. 403; 1 Taunt. 263; 1 T. R. 435; n. See the following 
cases where the bequests were to "poor relations;" 1 P. Wms. 327; 8 Serg. & 
Rawle, 45; 1 Sch. & Lef. 111; "most necessitous relations;" Ambl. 636. 
    21.-2. To this general rule there are several exceptions, namely, 
first, when the testator has delegated a power to an individual to 
distribute the fund among the testator's relations according to his 
discretion; in such an instance whether the bequest be made to "relations" 
generally, or to "poor," or "poorest," or "most necessitous" relations, the 
person may exercise his discretion in distributing the property among the 
testator's kindred although they be not within the statute of distributions. 
1 Scho. & Lef. 111, and 16 Ves. 43; 1 T. R. 485, n.; Ambl. 708; 16 Ves. 27, 
43. Secondly. Another exception occurs where a testator has fixed ascertain 
test, by which the number of relatives intended by him to participate in his 
property, can be ascertained; as if a legacy be given to such of the 
testator's relations as should not be worth a certain sum, in such case, it 
seems, all the testator's relatives answering the description would take, 
although not within the degrees of the statute of distributions. Ambl. 798. 
Thirdly. Another exception to the general rule is, where a testator has 
shown an intention in his will, to comprehend relations more remote than 
those entitled nuder the statute; in that case his intention will prevail. 1 
Bro. C. C. 32, n., and see 1 Cox, 235. 
    22.-3. The word "relation" or "relations," may be so qualified as to 
exclude some of the next of kin from participating in the bequest; and this 
will also happen when the terms of the bequest are to my "nearest 
relations;" 19 Ves. 400; Coop. 275; 1 Bro. C. C. 293; and see 1 Ves. sen. 
337; Ambl. 70; to testator's relations of his name 1 Ves. sen. 336; or 
stock, or blood; 15 Ves. 107. 
    23.-4. The word relations being governed by the statute of 
distributions, no person can regularly answer the description but those who 
are of kin to the testator by blood, consequently relatives by marriage are 
not included in a bequest to relations generally. 1 Ves. sen. 84; 3 Atk. 
761; 1 Bro. C. C. 71, 294. 
    24.-6. Legacies to next of kin. 1. When a bequest is made to 
testator's next of kin, it is understood the testator means such as are 
related to him by blood. But it is not necessary that the next of kin should 
be of the whole blood, the half blood answering the description of next of 
kin, are equally entitled with the whole, and if nearer in degree, will 
exclude the whole blood. 1 Ventr. 425; Alley. L. D. of Mar. 36; Sty. 74. 
    25-2. Relations by marriage are in general excluded from 
participating in a legacy given to the next of kin. 18 Ves. 53; 14 Ves. 376, 
381, 386; and, see 3 Ves. 244; 18 Ves. 49. But this is only a prima facie 
construction, which may be repelled by the contrary intention of a testator. 
14 Ves. 382. 
    26.-3. A testator is to be understood to mean by the expression "next 
of kin," when he does not refer to the statute, or to a distribution of the 
property as if he had died intestate, those persons only who should be 
nearest of kin to him, to the exclusion of others who might happen to be 
within the degree limited by the statute. 3 Bro. C. C. 69; 19 Ves. 404; 14 
Ves. 385. See 3 Bro. C. C. 64. 
    27.-4. Nearest of kin will alone be entitled under a bequest to the 
next of kin in equal degree. 12 Ves. 433; 1 Madd. 36. 
    28.-7. Legacies to legal personal representatives or to personal 
representatives. 1. Where there is nothing on the face of the will to 
manifest a different intention, the legal construction of the words 
"personal representatives," or "legal personal representatives," is 
executors or administrators of the person described. 6 Ves. 402; 6 Mead. 
159. A legacy limited to the personal or legal personal representatives of 
A, unexplained by anything in the will, will entitle A's executors or 
administrators to it, not as representing A, or as part of his estate, or 
liable to his debts, but in their own right as personae designated by the 
law. 2 Mad. 155. 
    29.-2. In the following cases the executors or administrators were 
held to be entitled under the designation of personal, or legal personal 
representatives. 3 Ves. 486; Anstr. 128. 
    30.-3. The next of kin and not the executors or administrators, were, 
in the following cases, held to be entitled under the same designation. 3 
Bro. C. C. 224, approved by Lord Rosslyn in 3 Ves. 486; 3 Ves. 146; 19 Ves. 
404. 
    31.-4. The same words were held to mean children, grandchildren, &c. 
to the exclusion of those persons who technically answer the description of 
"personal representatives." 3 Ves. 383. 
    32.-5. A husband or wife may take as such, if there is a manifest 
intention in the will that they should and if either be clothed with the 
character of executor or administrator of the other, the prima facie legal 
title attaches to the office, which will prevail, unless an intention to the 
contrary be expressed or clearly apparent in the instrument. See 14 Ves. 
382; 18 Ves. 49; 3 Ves. 231; 2 Ves. sen. 84; 3 Atk. 758; 1 Rop. on H.& W., 
326; 2 Rop. on H.& W., 64. 
    33.-8. The construction of bequests when limited to executors and 
administrators. 1. Where personal estate is given to B, his executors and 
administrators, the law transfers to B the absolute interest in the legacy. 
15 Ves. 537; 2 Mad. 155. 
    34.-2. If no interest were given to B, and the bequest were to his 
executors and administrators, it should seem that the individual answering 
the description would be beneficially entitled as personal designatee, in 
analogy to the devise of real estate to the heir of B, without a previous 
limitation to B, whose heir would take by purchase in his own right, and not 
by force of the word "heir" considered as a term of limitation. 2 Mad. 155. 
See 8 Com. Dig. Devise of Personal Property, xxxvi. 
    35:-9. Legacies to descendants. 1. A legacy to the descendants of A, 
will comprehend all his children, grandchildren, &c.; and if the will direct 
the bequest to be divided equally among them, they are entitled to the fund 
per capita. Ambl. 97; 3 Bro. C. C. 369. 
    36.-10. Legacies to a family. 1. The word family, when applied to 
personal property, is synonymous with "kindred," or "relations;" see 9 Ves. 
323. This being the ordinary acceptation of the word family, it may 
nevertheless be confined to particular relations by the context of the will; 
or the term may be enlarged by it, so that the expression may, in some 
cases, mean children, or next of kin, and in others may even include 
relations by marriage. See 8 Ves. 604; Dy. 333; 5 Ves. 166; Hob. 33; Coop. 
122; 5 M. & S. 126; 17 Ves. 263; 1 Taunt. 266; 14 Ves. 488; 9 Ves. 319; 3 
Meriv. 689. 
    37.-11. Legacies to servants. 1. To entitle himself to a bequest "to 
servants," the relation of master and servant must have arisen out of a 
contract by which the claimant must have formed an engagement which entitled 
the master to the service of the individual during the whole period, or each 
and every part of the time for which he contracted to, serve. 12 Ves. 114; 2 
Vern. 546. 
    38.-2. To claim as a servant, the legatee must in general be in the 
actual service of the testator at the time of his death. Still a servant may 
be considered by a testator as continuing in his employment, and be intended 
to take under the bequest, although he quitted the testator's house previous 
to his death, so as to answer the description in the instrument; and to 
establish which fact declarations of the testator upon the subject cannot be 
rejected; but testimony that the testator meant a servant notwithstanding 
his having left the testator's service, to take a legacy bequeathed only to 
servants in his employment at his death, cannot be received as in direct 
opposition to the will. 16 Ves. 486, 489. 
    39.-12. The different periods of time at which persons answering the 
descriptions of next of kin, family relations, issue, heirs, descendants and 
personal representatives, (to whom legacies are given by those terms 
generally,  and without discrimination,) were required to be in esse, for 
the purpose of participating in the legatory fund. 1. When the will 
expresses or clearly shows that a testator in bequeathing to the relations, 
&c. of a deceased individual, referred to such of them as were in existence 
when the will was made, they only will be entitled; as if the bequest was, 
"I give �1000 to the descendants of the late A B, now living," those 
descendants only in esse at the date of the will can claim the legacy. Ambl. 
397. 
    40.-2. But, in general, a will begins to speak at the death of the 
testator, and consequently in ordinary cases, relations, next of kin, issue, 
descendants, &c., living at that period will alone divide the property 
bequeathed to them by those words. See 1 Ball &. Beat. 459; 1 Bro. C. C. 
532; 3 Bro. C. C. 224; 5 Ves. 399; 1 Jac. & Walk, 388, n.; 3 Meriv. 689; 5 
Binn. 607; 2 Murph. 178. 
    41.-3. If a testator express, or his intention otherwise appear from 
his will, that a bequest to his relations, &c., living at the death of a 
person, or upon the happening of any other event, should take the fund, his 
next of kin only in existence at the period described, will be entitled, in 
exclusion of the representatives of such of them as happened to be then 
dead. 3 Ves. 486; 9 Ves. 325; 1 Atk. 469; 15 Ves. 27; 4 Vin. Abr. 485, pl. 
16; 8 Ves. 38; 5 Binn. 606; see 6 Munf. 47. 
    42.-13. When the fund given to legatees, by the description of 
"family," "relations" "next in kin," &c., is to be divided among them either 
per capita, or per stirpes, or both per stirpes et capita. 1. Where the 
testator gives a legacy to his relations generally, if his next of kin be 
related to him in equal degree, as brothers, there being no children of a 
deceased brother, the brothers will divide the fund among them in equal 
shares, or per capita; each being entitled in his own right to an equal 
share. So it would be if all the brothers had died before the testator, one 
leaving two children, another three, &c., all the nephews and nieces would 
take in equal shares, per capita, in their own rights, and not as 
representing their parents; because they are sole next of kin, and related 
to the testator in equal degree. Pre. Ch. 54; and see 1 P. Wms. 595; 1 Atk. 
454; 3 P. Wms. 50. But if the testator's next of kin happen not to be 
related to him in equal degrees, as a brother, and the children of a 
deceased brother, so as that under the statute the children would take per 
stirpes as representing their parent, namely, the share he would have taken 
had he been living; yet if the testator has shown au intention that his next 
of kin shall be entitled to his property in equal shares, i. e. per capita, 
the distribution by the statute will be superseded. This may happen where 
the bequest is to relations, next of kin, &c., to be equally divided among 
them; or by expressions of like import. Forrest. 251; and see 1 Bro. C. C. 
33; 8 Serg. & Rawle, 43; 11 Serg. & Rawle 103; 1 Murph. 383. 
    43.-2. Where a bequest is to relations, &c., those persons only who 
are next of kin are entitled, and the statute of distributions is adopted, 
not only to ascertain the persons who take, but also the proportions and 
manner in which the property is to be divided; the will being silent upon 
the subject, if the next of kin of the person described be not related to 
him in equal degree, those most remote can only claim per stirpes, or in 
right of those who would have been entitled under the statute if they had 
been living. Hence it appears that taking per stirpes, always supposes an 
inequality in relationship. For example, where a testator bequeaths a legacy 
to his "relations," or "next of kin," and leaves at his death two children, 
and three grandchildren, the children of a deceased child; the grandchildren 
would take their parents' share, that is, one-third per stirpes under the 
statute, as representing their deceased parent. 1 Cox, 235. 
    44.-3. Where a testator bequeaths personal estate to several persons 
as tenants in common, with a declaration that upon all or any of their 
deaths before a particular time, their respective shares shall be equally 
divided among the issue or descendants of each of them, and they die before 
the arrival of the period, some leaving children, others grandchildren, and 
great grandchildren, and other grandchildren and more remote descendants in 
such case the issue of each deceased person will take their parents share 
per stirpes; and such issue, whether children only, or children and 
grandchildren, &c., will divide each parent's share among them equally per 
capita. 1 Ves. sen. 196. 
    45.-14. The effect of a mistake in the names of legatees. 1. Where the 
name has been mistaken in a will or deed, it will be corrected from the 
instrument, if the intention appear in the description of the legatee or 
donee, or in other parts of the will or deed. For example, if a testator 
give a bequest to Thomas second son of his brother John, when in fact John 
had no son named Thomas, and his second son was called William; it was held 
William was entitled. 19 Ves. 381; Coop. 229; and see Ambl. 175; Co. Litt. 
3, a; Finch's R. 403; 3 Leon, 18. When a bequest is made to a class of 
individuals, nominatim, and the name or christian name of one of them is 
omitted, and the name or christian name of another is repeated; if the 
context of the will show that the repetition of the name was error, and the 
name of the person omitted was intended to have been inserted, the mistake 
will be corrected. As where a testator gave his residuary estate to his six 
grandchildren, by their christian names. The name of Ann, one of them, was 
repeated, and the name of Elizabeth, another of them, was omitted. The 
context of the will clearly showed the mistake which had occurred, and 
Elizabeth was admitted to an equal share in the bequest. 1 Bro. C. C. 30; 
see 2 Cox, 186. And is to cases where parol evidence will be received to 
prove the mistakes in the names or additions of legatees, and to ascertain 
the proper person, see 3 B. & A. 632 to 642; 6 T. R. 676; 2 P. Wms. 137; 1 
Atk. 410: 1 P. Wms. 421; 5 Rep. 68, b; 6 Ves. 42; 7 East, 302; Ambl. 75. 
    46.-15. The effect of mistakes in the descriptions of legatees, and 
the admission of parol evidence in those cases. 1. Where the description of 
the legatee is erroneous, the error not having been occasioned by any fraud 
practiced upon the testator, and there is no doubt as to the person who was 
intended to be described, the mistake will not disappoint the bequest. Hence 
if a legacy be given to a person by a correct name, but a wrong description 
or addition, the mistaken description will not vitiate the bequest, but be 
rejected; for it is a maxim that veritas nominis tollit errorem 
demonstrationis. Ld. Bac. Max. reg. 25; and see 2 Ves. jr. 589; Ambl. 75; 4 
Ves. 808; Plowd. 344; 19 Ves. 400. 
    47.-2. Wherever a legacy is given to a person under a particular 
description and character which he himself has falsely assumed; or, where a 
testator, induced by the false representations of third persons to regard 
the legatee in a relationship which claims his bounty, bequeaths him a 
legacy according with such supposed relationship, and no motive for such 
bounty can be supposed, the law will not, in either case, permit the legatee 
to avail himself of the description, and therefore he cannot demand his 
legacy. See 4 Ves. 802; 4 Bro. C. C. 20. 
    48.-3. The same principle which has established the admissibility of 
parol evidence to correct errors in naming legatees, authorizes its 
allowance to rectify mistakes in the description of them. Ambl. 374; 1 Ves. 
jr. 266; 1 Meriv. 184. 
    49.-4. If neither the will nor extrinsic evidence is sufficient to 
dispel the ambiguity arising from the attempt to apply the description of 
the legatee to the person intended by the testator, the legacy must fail 
from the uncertainty of its object. 7 Ves. 508; 6 T. R. 671. 
    50.-16. The consequences of imperfect descriptions of, or reference to 
legatees, appearing upon the face of wills, and when parol evidence is 
admissible. These cases occur, 1. When a blank is left for the Christian 
name of the legatee. 2. When the whole name is omitted. 3. When the testator 
has merely written the initials of the name; and, 4. When legatees have been 
once accurately described, but in a subsequent reference to one of them, to 
take an additional bounty, the person intended is doubtful, from ambiguity 
in the terms. 
    51.-1. When a blank is left for the Christian name of the legatee, 
evidence is admissible to supply the omission. 4 Ves. 680. 
    52.-2. When the omission consists of the entire name of the legatee, 
parol evidence cannot be admitted to supply the blank. 2 Ch. Ca. 51.; 2 Atk. 
239; 3 Bro. C.C. 311. 
    53.-3. When a legatee is described by the initials of his name only, 
parol evidence may be given to prove his identity. 3 Ves. 148. When a patent 
ambiguity arises from an imperfect reference to one of two legatees 
correctly described in a prior part of the will, parol evidence is admitted 
to show which of them was intended, so that the additional legacy intended 
for the one will depend upon the removal of the obscurity by a sound 
interpretation of the whole will. 3 Atk. 257 and see 2 Ves. 217; 2 Eden, 
107. 
     See further, upon this subject, Lownd on Leg. ch. 4; 1 Roper on Leg. 
ch. 2; Com. Dig. Chancery, 3 Y; Bac. Abr. h.. t. Vin. Abr. h.t.; Nels. Abr. 
h.t.; Whart. Dig. Wills, G. P.; Hamm. Dig. 756; Grimk. on Ex. ch. 5; 
Toll. on Executors, ch. 4. 



Thesaurus Results for Legate:

1. Moby Thesaurus II by Grady Ward, 1.0
ambassador, ambassadress, apostolic delegate, attache, career diplomat, chancellor, charge, commercial attache, commissar, commissary, commissionaire, commissioner, consul, consul general, consular agent, delegate, diplomat, diplomatic, diplomatic agent, diplomatist, emissary, envoy, envoy extraordinary, foreign service officer, herald, internuncio, messenger, military attache, minister, minister plenipotentiary, minister resident, nuncio, plenipotentiary, resident, secretary, secretary of legation, vice-consul, vice-legate
Common Misspellings >
Most Popular Searches: Define Misanthrope, Define Pulchritudinous, Define Happy, Define Veracity, Define Cornucopia, Define Almuerzo, Define Atresic, Define URL, Definitions Of Words, Definition Of Get Up, Definition Of Quid Pro Quo, Definition Of Irreconcilable Differences, Definition Of Word, Synonyms of Repetitive, Synonym Dictionary, Synonym Antonyms. See our main index and map index for more details.

©2011-2024 ZebraWords.com - Define Yourself - The Search for Meanings and Meaning Means I Mean. All content subject to terms and conditions as set out here. Contact Us, peruse our Privacy Policy