Don Vicente Singson Pablo, a lawyer of  Vigan, Ilocos Sur, died on April 15,1938, without any  descendant or ascendant, his  nearest  surviving relatives  being  his  widow  Doña Rosalia Rosario, four brothers, and four nieces,  the children of a deceased sister.  He left a will which was duly probated, clause 8 of which reads as follows:

"Octavo. Ordeno y mando que todos mis bienes no dispuestos de otro modo en este testamento, se  distribuiran en partes iguales a todos los que tienen derecho a ello."

The widow,  as administratrix, presented  a  project of partition in which the properties not disposed  of in the will were adjudicated to the four brothers and the four nieces of the deceased "in the proportion provided in paragraph 8 of the will."  The brothers, appellants  herein, objected to the project  of partition insofar as it includes  the nieces of the deceased, on the ground that under clause  8 of the will, in relation to article 751 of the Civil Code, they were not entitled to any share.  The nieces also objected to the project of partition, alleging that certain other  specified  properties had been omitted therefrom, which formed part of the properties not disposed of and which under clause 8 of the will "should be distributed in equal parts to all who are entitled thereto."  The trial court sustained the  contention of the nieces  (appellees herein) and ordered  the administratrix "to amend the project of partition so  as to include therein the  said properties and that all of those not disposed  of in the will  be  adjudicated in  equal  parts to the brothers and nieces of the deceased."

The only question raised in this appeal is  the interpretation of clause 8  of the will above quoted.  Said clause provides that "all of my properties not disposed  of otherwise in this testament shall  be distributed in equal parts  to all who are entitled thereto."  In this connection  appellants invoke article 751 of the  Civil Code, which provides that "a disposition made in general terms in favor  of the testator's relatives shall be understood as made in favor of those nearest in degree."

The trial court noted that the testator, who was a lawyer, did not use  the word "relatives" in the clause in question. We do not need to decide here whether,  had the testator used  the word "relatives," the nieces would  be excluded. The authorities differ on the interpretation of article 751. Some hold that under said article the nephews and nieces inherit by representation together with the brothers  and sisters of the testator, as in legal succession; while others, Manresa among them, hold that said article excludes nephews and nieces when brothers and sisters survive.  We think the testator, by referring to "all who are entitled thereto," instead  of referring to his "relatives,"  precisely meant to avoid the uncertainty of the interpretation of article 751 and to indicate his wish that the residue of his estate be distributed in equal parts to all who would have been  entitled to inherit from him had he died intestate.

The order appealed from is  affirmed,  with costs.   So ordered.

Yulo, C. J., Moran, Paras, and Bocobo, JJ.,  concur.