Appeals, Nos. 89 and 91, Jan. T., 1953, from decree of Orphans' Court of Montgomery County, Nos. 52,764 and 52,765, in Estate of Wilhelminna G. Anderson, deceased. Decree affirmed.
Joseph P. Gaffney, with him Desmond J. McTighe and Duffy, McTighe & McElhone, for City, trustee.
Henry W. Maxmin, with him Daniel L. Quinlan, Jr., Myron Jacoby, Jacoby & Maxmin, William A. O'Donnell, Jr., and Rutter, O'Donnell & Mauger, for executors and trustees.
Before Stern, C.j., Stearne, Jones, Bell, Chidsey and Arnold, JJ.
OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE BELL
These appeals are in effect an appeal from a decree which amended an adjudication and an order for distribution.
William M. Anderson died possessed of an estate which was insufficient to pay his debts and taxes. He also had a life interest with a power of appointment in a Marital Deduction Trust created by his wife. The City of Philadelphia as trustee under the will of Stephen Girard, was a large creditor of Mr. Anderson, its claim arising out of a bond and mortgage executed by the decedent. The City contends that the decedent blended the Marital Deduction Trust with his own individual estate and its claim is payable out of the combined funds. Was there such a blending?
Anderson in the first paragraph of his will directed the payment of his just debts and funeral expenses. In the second paragraph of his will he directed his executors "to divide all the rest, residue and remainder of my Estate..., including such property over which I shall be given the power of appointment under the... Last Will... of my wife... into six (6) equal parts, and I give, devise and bequeath one of said equal parts unto each of my following children [naming them]...."
In the interpretation of a will the intention of the testator is the pole star and that intention must be ascertained from a consideration of the entire will and all the surrounding and attendant circumstances: Newlin Estate, 367 Pa. 527, 80 A.2d 819. The question of blending is likewise a question of intention: Jackson's Estate, 337 Pa. 561, 564, 12 A.2d 338. Did the testator
intend to blend his wife's estate with his own and treat the two estates as one for all purposes; or did he intend to blend his wife's estate with his own for certain limited purposes, one of which was for the purpose of distribution to named legatees or upon specific trusts? That is the first important question.
The intention of this testator is clear from the language of his will, i.e., his just debts and funeral expenses are to be paid out of his own individual estate and all the rest, residue and remainder of his estate, together with his wife's estate over which he had a power of appointment, is to be paid to or held for their children in equal shares; in other words, he wanted the mother's estate to ...