Exceptions.

Testator in loco

But though a period is appointed for payment, or the legacy is contingent, interest runs from the death :—

1. Where the legatee is an infant child of the testator, parentis to or an infant to whom the testator has placed himself in an infant. loco parentis, and the will provides no other maintenance, whether the legacy be vested or contingent. Harvey v. Harvey, 2 P. W. 21; Incledon v. Northcote, 3 Atk. 432, 438; Donovan v. Needham, 9 B. 164; May v. Potter, 25 W. R. 507; see Mole v. Mole, 1 Dick. 310.

Provision for maintenance.

General intention to

ance.

If the testator has made a provision for the maintenance of his infant children, interest only runs from the time when the legacy is payable. Hearle v. Greenbank, 3 Atk. 697, 716; Wynch v. Wynch, 1 Cox, 433; see In re George, 5 Ch. D. 837.

Where there is provision for maintenance during a portion of the minority of the legatee, interest on the legacy will be allowed during the rest. Chambers v. Goldwin, 11 Ves. 1; Martin v. Martin, L. R. 1 Eq. 369; see Cusack v. Jellicoe, 22 W. R. 344.

2. If the infant legatee is a stranger, but the income is given for maintenance, interest runs from the death. In re Richards, 8 Eq. 119; Chidgey v. Whitby, 41 L. J. Ch. 699.

3. Upon similar grounds, where the legatees are strangers, provide if a general intention is expressed of providing for their mainten- maintenance out of their legacies, interest runs from the death. Pett v. Fellows, 1 Sw. 561, note; Lambert v. Parker, Coop. t. Eldon, 143; Leslie v. Leslie, Ll. & G. t. Sug. 1.

Lord Cranworth's

Act.

The fact that maintenance is given in one particular event which does not happen is not enough. Festing v. Allen, 5 Ha. 575.

Under Lord Cranworth's Act, 23 & 24 Vict. c. 145, sec. 26, which applies to wills executed or confirmed after the 28th August, 1860, the whole or any part of the income of

any legacy, to the income and capital of which an infant is contingently entitled, may be paid towards his maintenance in all cases.

That Act enables the income of a legacy to be applied for maintenance, though the gift both of income and capital is contingent, provided the legatee will be entitled to income and capital if the legacy becomes vested. In re Cotton, 1 Ch. D. 232; see In re Breed's Will, 1 Ch. D. 226.

It does not apply to a case where the legatee would not be entitled to the intermediate income in the event of the legacy becoming vested. In re George, 5 Ch. D. 837.

fund.

4. Where a fund is directed to be at once set apart from Severed the rest of the testator's estate, it carries the income from the testator's death. Boddy v. Dawes, 1 Kee. 362; Dundas v. Wolfe Murray, 1 H. & M. 425; Johnson v. O'Neill, 3 L. R. Ir. 476.

A fund which has been severed for the benefit of a tenant for life and remainderman carries the interest accruing between the death of the tenant for life and the vesting in the remainderman. Kidman v. Kidman, 40 L. J. Ch. 359.

To entitle the legatees of a severed fund to interest before vesting the severance must be necessary from causes connected with the legacy itself, and not, for instance, because the residue has become immediately payable. Festing v. Allen, 5 Ha. 578.

Where there is a future gift of principal" with interest," Future gift of interest is calculated from the end of a year after the principal testator's death till the time of payment. Knight v. Knight, 2 S. & St. 490.

with

interest.

Where a vested legacy is given to an infant and no time Vested of payment is fixed and the legacy is given over upon a divested. contingency, the infant or his representatives are entitled to the interest which has accrued due till the contingency

legacy

From what time

are pay

able.

happens. Taylor v. Johnson, 2 P. W. 504; Barber v. Barber, 3 M. & Cr. 688; Mills v. Robarts, 1 R. & M. 555.

The person taking a vested interest under the gift over, no condition as to payment being annexed to his gift, is entitled to interest from the time when the gift over takes effect, or from a year after the testator's death, whichever period is latest. Laundy v. Williams, 2 P. W. 481.

VIII. PAYMENT OF ANNUITIES.

An annuity begins to run from the death of the testator; annuities the first payment is therefore due at the end of a year unless the annuity is directed to be paid monthly or quarterly, in which case instalments are payable at the end of the first month or quarter. Houghton v. Franklin, 1 S. & St. 390.

Particular legacy for life with

remainder.

Arrears of

an annuity do not carry interest.

If payment on stated quarterly days is directed a proportional 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.

It does not appear to be quite settled when interest is payable on a gift of a particular legacy, not residuary, to one for life with remainder over; see Gibson v. Bott, 7 Ves. 89, where Lord Eldon lays down that interest is not payable till the end of the second year.

Arrears of an annuity will not as a rule carry interest. Batten v. Earnley, 2 P. Wms. 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.

IX. LEGACY DUTY AND INCOME TAX.

duty

a gift free from duty.

deduc

Legacy duty, in the absence of a direction to the contrary, Legacy is in all cases payable by the legatee even though the legacy what is to a creditor in discharge of a debt due from a third amounts to person. Foster v. Ley, 2 Sc. 438; 2 B. N. C. 269. Legacies given free from deduction or free from expense, Free from or free from charge or liability, are free from duty. Barks- tions. dale 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.

"clear"

A gift of a clear sum or annuity is a gift clear of legacy Gift of a duty. Gude v. Mumford, 2 Y. & C. Ex. 448; Haynes v. Haynes, 3 D. M. & G. 590.

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.

A direction to pay an annuity free from deduction will not release the legatee from paying income tax. Abadam v. Abadam, 12 W. R. 615; 33 B. 475; Turner v. Mullineux, 1 J. & H. 334.

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.

sum.

Moneywhat it includes.

What it does not include.

CHAPTER XVIII.

AS TO THE MEANING OF CERTAIN WORDS.

I. MONEY includes bank notes (a), money at the bank on a current account as well as on deposit (b), money in the hands of an agent of the testator (c), apparently arrears of a superannuation 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. 476 (e).

It will not pass an apportioned part of an annuity nor accruing interest (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). Byrom v. Brandreth, 16 Eq. 475 (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).

Money will, however, pass stock where there is at the date of the will and the death no money properly so called;