PAROL EVIDENCE, HOW FAR ADMISSIBLE. The rule in regard to the admissibility of parol evidence to vary, control, or to render intelligible the words of a will, is not essen tially different from that which obtains in re gard to contracts. It may be received to show the state of the testator, the nature and condition of his property, his relation to the contestants, and all the surrounding circum stances. But this is done to place the court in the condition of the testator, in order as far as practicable to enable them the more fully to understand the sense in which he probably used the language found in his will. 1 Nev. & M. 524 ; 15 .Pick. Mass. 400 ; 11 id. 257 ; 1 Phillipps, Ev. 532-547 ; Cowen & IIill's Notes ; 1 Greenleaf, Ev. a 287-289 ; 1 Jarman, Wills, 349, and notes ; 2 Ired. No. C. 192. Letters and oral declarations of the testator are not admissible to show the inten tion of the testator. 2 Vern. Ch. 625; 14 Johns. N. Y. 1 ; 2 Watts & S. Penn. 455. But see 22 Wend. N. Y. 148. Parol evidence is not admissible to supply any word or de feet in the will. 7 Gill & J. Md. 127., 8 Conn. 254 ; 23 Barb. N. Y. 285 ; 27 Ala. N. s. 489. Petrol declarations of the testator about the time of making the will are often ad mitted to show the state of mind, capacity, and understanding of the testator; but they are not to be used to show his intention: that must be learned from the language used.
8 Conn. 254.
14. Courts of equity cannot reform a will upon proof of mistake, as they do a contract. 5 Madd. Ch. 364 ; 1 Moore & S. 352 ; 6 Conn. 34 ; 23 Vt. 336. Parol evidence is admis sible to explain and remove a latent ambiguity. 1 Maule & S. 345 ; 4 Barnew. & Ad. 787 ; 6 Metc. Mass. 404, 405 : 2 Jones, Eq. No. C. 377 ; 6 Md. 224 ; 1 Jarman, Wills, 170, and cases cited ; 1 Crompt. & M. Exch. 235 ; 1 Mer. Ch. 384 ; 1 Paige, Ch. N. Y. 291 ; 5 Mees. & W. Exch. 369. So, also, to rebut a resulting trust. 14 Johns. N. Y. 1 ; 1 Jar man, Wills, 157, and cases cited. But where a wrong name is inserted in the will by mis take of the scrivener, or where the name is left wholly blank, parol evidence is not admis sible in order to carry into effect the purpose of the testator. 7 Mete. Mass. 188 ; 3 Brown, Ch. c. 311. But a partial blank may be sup plied. 4 Ves. Ch. 680. See 1 Jarman, Wills, 349-384 ; 2 Williams, Ex. 1037, 1049, 1050, 1080-1082, 1164-1166 ; 5 Mees. & W. Exch. 363. But where the residuary legatee was described by a wrong Christian name, paroi evidence was received to show who was in. tended. 1 Paige, Ch. N. Y. 291. See, also, 4 Johns. Ch. N. Y. 607.