MAXIMS OF THE LAW. 193 



and that the tenant in tail in possession was meant to be at 

 large. 



Of these infinite cases might be put, for it holdeth gene 

 rally that all ambiguity of words by matter within the deed, 

 and not out of the deed, shall be holpen by construction, or 

 in some case by election, but never by averment, but rather 

 shall make the deed void for uncertainty. 



But if it be ambiguitas latens, then otherwise it is : as if 

 I grant my manor of S. to I. F. and his heirs, here appear- 

 eth no ambiguity at all ; but if the truth be, that I have 

 the manors both of South S. and North S. this ambiguity 

 is matter in fact, and therefore it shall be holpen by aver 

 ment, whether of them was that the party intended should 

 pass. 



So if I set forth my land by quantity, then it shall be 

 supplied by election, and not averment. 



As if I grant ten acres of wood in sale, where I have a 

 hundred acres, whether I say it in my deed or no, that I 

 grant out of my hundred acres, yet here shall be an election 

 in the grantee, which ten he will take. 



And the reason is plain, for the presumption of the law 

 is, where the thing is only nominated by quantity, that the 

 parties had indifferent intentions which should be taken, 

 and there being no cause to help the uncertainty by inten 

 tion, it shall be holpen by election. 



But in the former case the difference holdeth, where it 

 is expressed and where not ; for if I recite, Whereas I am 

 seised of the manor of North S. and South S. I lease unto 

 you unum manerium de S. there it is clearly an election. 

 So if I recite, Where I have two tenements in St. Dun- 

 stan s, I lease unto you unum tenementum, there it is an 

 election, not averment of intention, except the intent were 

 of an election, which may be specially averred. 



Another sort of ambiguitas latens is correlative unto these : 

 for this ambiguity spoken of before, is when one name and 

 appellation doth denominate divers things, and the second, 

 when the same thing is called by divers names. 



As if I give lands to Christ-Church in Oxford, and the 

 name of the corporation is Ecclesia Christi in Universitate 

 Oxford, this shall be holpen by averment, because there 

 appears no ambiguity in the words : for this variance is 

 matter in fact, but the averment shall not be of intention, 

 because it doth stand with the words. 



For in the case of equivocation the general intent includes 

 both the special, and therefore stands with the words : 



VOL. XIII. O 



