2. c. 4. (Papists)... ....... 71 3. c. 5. (Papists).. id. 36. c. 52. (Duty) .. 56. 276, 277. 294.399.427 7. c. 3. (Poor Apprentices)..277 37. c. 135. (Accountant Gene A TREATISE ON LEGACIES, &c. CHAPTER I. OF THE NATURE AND DIFFERENT KINDS OF LEGACIES. SECTION I. Of General or Pecuniary Legacies. A LEGACY is a gift by will of personal property. The word "devise" is more specially appropriated to a gift of lands; and every person, taking an interest in the produce of real estate directed to be sold, is in truth a devisee, and not a legatee. But the terms a coare used indifferently: legatees may take under a bequest to "all my devisees above named;" and the word legacy will pass a real estate, if from the context of the will it appears to have been the intention of the devisor. It is not material in what form a legacy is bequeathed; and any words manifesting an intention to give are sufficient: as if a man by his will • 4 Mad. 492. Coope v. Banning, 1 Sim. and St. 534. appoints to be paid or delivered; or disposes, assigns, deputes, or leaves such a thing to any one; or says, let such a person have such a thing; these and the like expressions are sufficient to create a good bequest. A direction given, or a request made to an executor and residuary legatee, to pay a sum of money to another person is a legacy, to be paid out of the testator's assets. Even promissory notes may be good testamentary gifts. A mere recital, it has been laid down, without more, will not amount to a gift, or demonstration of intention to give; and if a man says, out of the 100/. which I have bequeathed A. I give B. 50l. this passes nothing to A. although the gift of the 50l. to B. is good. Yet where the words were, "I have made a lease for 21 years to I. S. paying but 20s. rent," it was held a good lease, and that the words "I have " should be taken in the present tense. So where a man willed, that in case his niece A. should die without issue, that the premises before given to his said niece, should go to E. and S., it was held to imply a gift to A. and her issue; and that the words of gift being omitted by mistake, the Court would supply them. And in a late case it seems to have been thought, that a recital of a gift, as antecedently made, might amount to a gift, if there was nothing in the will to which the recital could refer.h g Bac. Ab. Leg. B. Godolph. 426. Wyvill, 3 Lev. 259. 472. Taylor v. George, 2 Ves. & B. 378. Brest v. Offley, 1 Ch. Rep. 246. See Att. Gen. v. Goulding, 2 Bro. 428. Chaworth v. Beech, 4 Ves. 555.. 18 Ves. 41; and see Wright v. e Godolph. 282. Bac. Ab. Leg. B. f Mo. 31. N. 101. In 2 Vent. 57, it is said this case is of little authority. B. 2. Bibin v. Walker, Ambl. 661. An exception, however, out of a bequest of property, of a certain part of it, "which is hereinafter given to A.," does not amount to a disposition to A.a And where a man, having given the interest of some stock to his wife, M. C. for life, bequeathed to each of his executors 501. " as they will be benefited hereafter, when the stock comes to be transferred after the death of their aunt, M. C.," this was not consi dered sufficient to give the stock to the executors after her death. The words also, "I do resolve not to give my natural son J. S. more than 207. per ann. for life, to be paid him quarterly," have been held not to amount to a devise, so that J. S. could take nothing. II. If a man gives a legacy to A. willing or de- -Jenson & Wh siring, hoping, recommending,' requesting, entreating," not doubting, or in the fullest confidence,* that he do at his death give it, or a particular part of it, to J. S., this is a trust in equity, and amounts to a legacy to J. S. on the death of A. So where Sir T. L. by will "in consideration that Lady L. has promised to give what I shall give her to her and myringom 3 my • Frederick v. Hall, 1 Ves. J. 396; and see Upton v. Lord Ferrers, 5 id. 801. 491. • Harland v. Trigg, 1 Bro. 142, te. 603 Bard: swille B.green Malim v. Keighley, 2 Ves. J. 333.per 2 10 529, which explains the grounds. 1. Ford of Cunliffe v. Cunliffe, Ambl. 686. Fowler. 3-3Les 146. Knight h Paul v. Compton, 8 Ves. 375. b. 14. Raike • Pierson v. Garnet, 2 Bro. 38. ord. Ha Eade v. Eade, 5 Mad. 118. Constantine v. Constantine, 6 445. Gochethr ↳ Prevost v. Clarke, 2 Mad. 458.451. Steffe i Massey v. Sherman, Ambl. 520. m. & Bear. Parsons v. Baker, 18 Ves. 476. 241. Worch aß. anthon 14 Jim's k Wright v. Atkyns, 17 Ves. 255. |