Browne v Stoughton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 04 July 1846 |
| Date | 04 July 1846 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 60 E.R. 401
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. sub nom. Browne v. Houghton, 15 L. J. Ch. 391; 10 Jur. 747.
Accumulation. Remoteness. Perpetuity.
MSIM. 3S. BROWNE V. STOUGHTON 401 "': l\ 1 -: /?/il 4c. ^369] browne v. stoughton. July 4, 1846. [S. C. sub nom. Browne v. Houghton, 15 L. J. Ch. 391 ; 10 Jur. 747.] Accumulation. Remoteness. Perpetuity. Testator devised his estates hi trust for the Plaintiff for life, with remainder to his first and other sons in tail male, with remainders over ; and directed that, if any person for the time being entitled to the possession of the estates should be under twenty-one, the trustees should, so long as the person so entitled should be under twenty-one, receive the rents and apply a competent part thereof for his maintenance, and invest the surplus, in their names, on Government or real security, and, from, time to time, receive the income thereof and invest the same in like securities, so that the same might accumulate, and should stand possessed of such surplus rents, together with the accumulations thereof, upon trust to invest the same, from time to time, in the purchase of real estates, to be forthwith settled to the uses and upon the trusts thereby declared of the devised estates. Held, that the trust was void for remoteness. John Browne, Esq., by his will, dated the 20th of April 1812, devised part of his estates unto and to the use of James Stoughton and Thomas Church and their heirs, upon trust for the Plaintiff, J. T. Graver Browne, the eldest son of G. D. Graver, during his life, subject to impeachment of waste for cutting down timber trees for any purpose whatsoever ; and, after the Plaintiffs decease, upon trust for his first and other sons, successively, in tail male, and, in default of such issue, upon the several further trusts in the will mentioned : (1) and the will provided that if, by any event, the said manors, lands and hereditaments should become subject in possession to any trust, before the person or persons in whose favour such trust was declared should be in existence, then that the trustees should receive the rents and profits thereof, and pay over and account for the same to the person or persons who would be entitled to the possession of the manors, lands and hereditaments if the other person or persons having the prior trust thereof should never come into existence, up to and until the last-mentioned person or persons should come into existence, or the possibility of his or their existence should have ceased. [370] And the will further provided that if any person for the time being beneficially entitled to the possession or to the receipt of tlie rents, issues and profits of any of the estates thereinbefore devised, should be under the age of twenty-one years, the trustees and the survivor of them and the heirs of such survivor should, so long as the person entitled as aforesaid should be under that age, receive the rents, issues and profits of the estates to which he or she should be entitled, and apply a competent part thereof for his or her maintenance, education and advancement, and invest the residue and surplus of such rents and profits in the names of the trustees, and the survivor of them, his executors or administrators, on Government or real security ; and from time to time receive the annual income and produce of the said investments, and again invest the same in such securities as aforesaid, to the intent and so that the same might accumulate in the nature of compound interest ; and should stand possessed of such surplus of the rents and profits, together with the accumulations thereof, upon the trusts and for the purposes thereinafter declared, nevertheless with full power...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Longfield v Bantry
...v. Advocate-GeneralENR 10 Cl. & Fin. 1, 17. Darley v. MartinENR 13 C. B. 683. Turvin v. NewcomeENR 3 K. & J. 16. Browne v. StoughtonENR 14 Sim. 369. Cochrane v. CochraneUNK 11 L. R. Ir. 361. Ferrand v. WilsonENR 4 Hare, 344. Stanley v. PotterENR 2 Cox, 180. Gardner v. HattenENR 6 Sim. 93. L......
-
Peard v Kekewich
...being declared void, it was held that C.'s eldest son was entitled in possession to the rents and interest: Browne v. Stoughton (14 Sim. 369). The Plaintiff is therefore entitled to the rents, which are payable immediately, without waiting for his attaining twenty-three : Saumkrs v. Fautier......
-
Cochrane v Cochrane
...v. Vere 9 Ves. 127. Briggs v. The Earl of OxfordENR 1 De G. M. & G. 363. Bateman v. HotchkinENR 10 Beav. 426. Browne v. StoughtonENR 14 Sim. 369. Turuin v. NewcomeENR 3 K. & J. 16. Lord Southampton v. Marquis of Hertford 2 Ves. & B. 54; app. 62. Marshall v. Holloway 2 Swanst. 432. Ferrand v......
-
Scarisbrick v Skelmersdale
...down to the remotest generation. The mode in which the fund is to be employed is not material. [They referred to Browne v. Stmujhton (14 Sim. 369 ; Sug. Seal Property, 346, 347, et seq.).] A trust for a series of accumulations is bad without reference to the purpose of the accumulations. It......