If payment on stated quarterly days is directed, a proportional Chap. XVII. part is payable on the first quarterly day. Williams v. Wilson, 5 N. R. 266.

If the first payment of an annuity payable quarterly is directed to be made at the end of eighteen months, a quarter's instalment is payable at that time. Irvin v. Ironmonger, 2 R. & M. 531.

As to the postponement of an annuity till debts and legacies are paid, see Astley v. Earl of Essex, 6 Ch. 898; Rawson v. M'Causland, I. R. 7 Eq. 284; 22 W. R. 145.

Where a sum of money is directed to be invested to produce an annuity, it appears to be doubtful whether the gift is to be considered as a legacy payable at the end of a year or as an annuity payable from the death. Gibson v. Bott, 7 Ves. 89. Arrears of an annuity will not as a rule carry interest. Batten v. Earnley, 2 P. W. 163; Anderson v. Dwyer, 1 Sch. & Lef. 301; Martin v. Blake, 3 Dr. & War. 125; Taylor v. Taylor, 8 Ha. 120; Torre v. Browne, 5 H. L. 555; Wheateley v. Davies, 24 W. R. 818.

Sum to produce annuity

Arrears of air annuity do not carry

interest.

IX. LEGACY DUTY AND INCOME TAX.

Legacy duty, in the absence of a direction to the contrary, is in all cases payable by the legatee even though the legacy is to a creditor in discharge of a debt due from a third person. Foster v. Ley, 2 Sc. 438; 2 B. N. C. 269.

Legacy duty —

what amounts

to a gift free from duty.

A direction to pay legacy duty does not include succession Direction to pay legacy duty payable in respect of leaseholds. In re Johnston; duty.

Cockerell v. Earl of Essex, 26 Ch. D. 538.

A general direction in the will to pay all legacies free of deduction for tax or duty will include legacies given by a codicil. Byne v. Currey, 2 Cr. & Mee. 603; 4 Tyr. 479. See Kirkpatrick v. Bedford, 4 App. C. 96.

But a direction in the will to pay the duty on legacies Legacies "herein given" will not include legacies given by a codicil. hereby given.

Early v. Benbow, 2 Coll. 354; Gillooly v. Plunkett, 9 L. R. Ir.

324. See Bonner v. Bonner, 13 Ves. 378; Radburn v. Jervis, 3 B. 450.

In some cases, however, such words as "foregoing legacies" or "herein mentioned" have upon the general intention been extended to legacies given by a codicil. Williams v. Hughes, 24 B. 474; Jauncey v. A.-G., 3 Giff. 308.

A direction to pay legacies free of duty is not necessarily limited to pecuniary legacies, but may include a debt which is forgiven, and stock legacies and specific legacies. Morris v. Livie, 11 L. J. Ch. 172; Ansley v. Cotton, 16 L. J. Ch. 55; In re Johnston; Cockerell v. Earl of Essex, 26 Ch. D. 538.

A direction to pay the legacy duty on the legacies and bequests given by the testator has been held not to include the duty on the proceeds of sale of realty directed to be sold and held on certain trusts. White v. Lake, 6 Eq. 188.

Legacies given free from deduction or free from expense, or free from charge or liability, are free from duty. Barksdale v. Gilliatt, 1 Sw. 652; Courtoy v. Vincent, T. & R. 433; Gosden v. Dotterill, 1 M. & K. 56; Louch v. Peters, 1 M. & K. 489; Warbrick v. Varley, 30 B. 241; see Stow v. Davenport, 5 B. & Ad. 357; 2 Nev. & M. 835; and see Turner v. Mullineux, 1 J. & H. 334.

A gift of a clear sum or annuity is a gift clear of legacy duty. Gude v. Mumford, 2 Y. & C. Ex. 448; Haynes v. Haynes, 3 D. M. & G. 590; In re Currie; Bjorkman v. Lord Kimberley, 57 L. J. Ch. 743; 59 L. T. 200; 36 W. R. 752.

This is the case although in another part of the will a clear yearly sum is expressed to be given free of legacy duty. Re Robins; Nelson v. Robins, 58 L. T. 382.

So is a gift of a fund to produce a clear annual sum, which sum is to be paid to the legatee. Morris v. Burton, 11 Sim. 161; Cole's Will, 8 Eq. 271.

But a gift of a fund to produce a clear annual sum, and to pay the dividends of the stock, and not the exact sum to the legatee, is not a gift free from legacy duty, the term clear being referred to the costs of investment. Banks v. Braithwaite, 32 L. J. Ch. 35; Sanders v. Kiddell, 7 Sim. 536; Pridie v. Field, 19 B. 497.

And a gift to employés of their "full salary" is not free from legacy duty, the word full being referred to incidental deductions.

In re Marcus; Marcus v. Marcus, 56 L. J. Ch. 830; 57 Chap. XVII. L. T. 399.

A direction to pay an annuity free from deduction or abate- Income tax. ment will not release the legatee from paying income tax, unless the testator shows that he regards income tax as a deduction. Abadam v. Abadam, 12 W. R. 615; 33 B. 475; Turner v. Mullineux, 1 J. & H. 334; Sadler v. Rickards, 4 K. & J. 302; Peareth v. Marriott, 22 Ch. D. 182; Gleadow v. Leetham, 22 Ch. D. 269; In re Buckle; Williams v. Marson, (1894) 1 Ch. 286.

But the testator may by proper words direct the income tax upon an annuity to be paid out of his estate. Festing v. Taylor, 11 W. R. 70; 3 B. & S. 217, 235; Lord Lovat v. Duchess of Leeds, 10 W. R. 397; 2 Dr. & Sm. 262; In re Bannerman's Estate; Bannerman v. Young, 21 Ch. D. 105.

CHAPTER XVIII.

Chap. XVIII.

it includes.

AS TO THE MEANING OF CERTAIN WORDS.

MONEY includes bank notes (a), money at the bank on a Money-what current account as well as on deposit (b), money in the hands of an agent of the testator (c), apparently arrears of a superannua tion allowance from government, and money payable by a friendly society for funeral expenses (d), and any money, of which at the time of the testator's death, he might have claimed immediate payment (e). Chapman v. Hart, 1 Ves. Sen. 271 (a); Manning v. Purcell, 7 D. M. & G. 55 (b); Ogle v. Knipe, 8 Eq. 434 (c); Collins v. Collins, 12 Eq. 455 (d); Byrom v. Brandreth, 16 Eq. 475 (e).

What it does not include.

It will not pass an apportioned part of an annuity nor accruing interest or dividends (a), nor money deposited with a stakeholder to abide the event of a bet (b), nor money due on a current account from a salesmaster (c), nor a legacy not acknowledged to be at the testator's disposal (d), nor stock in the funds (e), nor a sum due to the testator (f). Byrom v. Brandreth, 16 Eq. 475; see Re Beavan; Beavan v. Beavan, 53 L. T. 245 (a); Manning v. Purcell, 7 D. M. & G. 55 (b); Smith v. Butler, 3 J. & L. 565; De Roebuck v. Lord Cloncurry, I. R. 5 Eq. 588 (c); Byrom v. Brandreth, 16 Eq. 475 (d); Hotham v. Sutton, 15 Ves. 319; Gosden v. Dotterill, 1 M. & K. 56; Ommaney v. Butcher, T. & R. 260; Lowe v. Thomas, Kay, 369; 5 D. M. & G. 315; Collins v. Collins, 12 Eq. 455 (e); Dillon v. M'Donnell, 7 L. R. Ir. 335 (ƒ).

Money will, however, pass stock where there is at the date of the will and the death no money properly so called; or where stock is expressly referred to as money. Chapman v. Reynolds, 28 B. 221; Newman v. Newman, 26 B. 218.

When the word money

residue.

In some cases a larger sense has been given to the term Chap. XVIII. money, and it has been held to pass the residuary personalty : 1. It is clear that a gift of "the whole of my money" will will pass the only pass money properly so called, though there may be very little of it, and it is given for life with remainders, at any rate where the gift is followed by specific or general bequests. Lowe v. Thomas, Kay, 369; 5 D. M. & G. 315; Larner v. Larner, 3 Dr. 704.

So, too, money must be construed strictly where it is used as one of several terms of description, showing that it was not alone meant to pass the personal estate. Cowling v. Cowling, 26 B. 449; see In bonis Aston, 30 W. R. 92.

2. But where the testator declared himself desirous of making a settlement of his affairs, and appointed executors to take and receive all moneys in his possession or due to him, the whole personal estate was held to pass. Waite v. Combes, 5 De G.

& S. 676.

And in Prichard v. Prichard, 11 Eq. 232, the whole personal estate was held to pass under a gift of the "income of my principal money" to A. for life, and afterwards to be divided among her children, apparently on the ground that there was only a sum of 2391. money proper at the testator's death. See Cooke v. Wagster, 2 Sm. & G. 296.

And in In re Cadogan; Cadogan v. Palagi, 25 Ch. D. 154, the whole personal estate passed under a gift of "one half of the money of which I am possessed" to A., "and the remainder to" B. See, too, In re Townley; Townley v. Townley, 32 W. R. 549.

due of money

legacies.

When there is a direction to pay debts, or legacies have Gift of resibeen given, and the residue of money is then given, the whole after payment personal estate will pass. The general personalty being liable of debts and to pay debts and legacies, the residue must be a residue ejusdem generis. Lynn v. Kerridge, West. Rep. tem. Hard. 172; Legge v. Asgill, T. & R. 265, n.; Rogers v. Thomas, 2 Kee. 8; Dowson v. Gaskoin, ib. 14; Stocks v. Barré, Jo. 54; Barrett v. White, 24 L. J. Ch. 724; 1 Jur. N. S. 652; Grosvenor v. Durston, 25 B. 99; In bonis White, 7 P. D. 65; In re Hart; Hart v. Hernandez, 52 L. T. 217. See, too, Langdale v.