Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/324

310 FEDERAL REPORTER. �Then, after authorizing his exeeutors to sell any of his real estate "not herein fully disposed of , " it proceeds : �" It is my will that the rents, issues, and profits of the real estate given to rny exeeutors, or the proceeds thereof if sold, and the dividends of all my stocks gITen.tothem, or the proceeds if sold, and the proceeds of all other Per- sonal estate not required to pay debts and legacies hereinbefore given, be in- vested by my exeeutors in stock, or put out at interest, and suffered to accu- mulate until my eldest grandchild then living shall attain the age of 21 years, or until the decease of my son William, whichever shall first occur, and then the whole to be equally dlvided among all my grandchildren then living, and the children of any who may be dead leaving issue, sueh issue to take by rep- resentation. The said Eliza Ann, natural daughter of my son Nelson, to be considered a grandchild, and to be entitled to share as such. And in making such division, the amount of the devises made to Joseph, son of my son Will- iam, and to the said Eliza Ann, according to an estimate of their present value, to be made by three men appointed by my exeeutors, or by the orphans* court, to be charged to them or their children as part of their respective shares." �' Now, in construing the recited clauses, regard must be had to the fundamental principle that every part of the will is to take effect if possible. Says Mr. Jarman, (1 Jar; on Wills, 415, 41(5:) �" But the rule which sacrifices the former of several contradictory clauses is never applied but on the failure of every attempt to give Ihe whole such a construction as will render every part of it effective." �It is said in Sheetz's Appeal, 82 Pa. St. 213 : �" The clearly-expressed purpose of the testator is not to be oveiborne by modifying directions that are ambiguous and equivocal, and may justify either of two opposite interpretations. Such directions are to be so construed as to supp.qrt the testator's distinetly-anriounced main intention." �Here the devise to Eliza Ann Thornton of the tract of laud in con- troversy was ,th§ principal provision which the, testator ma,de for her, and his distinctly-announced intention in respect thereto was that in case she should die in her minority, and without lawful issue then living, the land so devised should revert and become part of the res- idue of his estate. What is there in the residuary clause which imperatively requires that the testator's intention thus plainly de- clared should be overthrown? Wherein is there any repugnancy becween the terms of the proviso to the particular devise to Eliza Ann, and the directions contained in the residuary clause? It is quite plain that the residuary clause bas relation primarlly to those portions of the estate not disposed of by the previous provisions of the will. The income therefrom was to accumulate until the tes- tator's eldest living grandchild should attain the age of 21 years, or ��� �