Harris v Earl Howe
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 28 February 1861 |
| Date | 28 February 1861 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 54 E.R. 627
ROLLS COURT
S. C. 30 L. J. Ch. 612; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 383; 9 W. R. 404.
[261] harris v. earl howe. Feb. 28, 1861. [S. C. 30 L. J. Ch. 612 ; 7 Jur. (N. S.) 383; 9 W. R. 404.] Bequest for poor persons, but no person to receive more than £5. Held, that legacy duty waa payable on the whole fund. Be Wilkinson (1 Cr. M. & R. 142 ; 1 Mee. & W. 237), impugned. The testator, Mr. Sutton, by his will dated 1854, said, " Whereas it has often been a subject of reflection with me, that amongst the patients receiving relief at the Leicester Infirmary and Fever House and discharged from thence convalescent or relieved, there may be many whose sickness may not only have incapacitated them for work, but may have plunged them into a state of deep poverty and distress, and that, upon their restoration to health, when they most of all need some pecuniary assistance to aid them in seeking employment or gaining a livelihood, there are no funds whatever to which the governors or visitors of the said infirmary or Fever House can resort, save to their own private funds. And whereas I am desirous of creating a fund, having for its special object the relief of such cases, and which I designate the ' Sutton Charity/ not from any motive of ostentation or vain glory, but in order that the trusts of the said fund and the purposes to which it is to be applied may be readily ascertained by a reference to this my will." He then gave to his executors all his personal estate, to be paid by them to the trustees of the Sutton Charity, who were to invest it and apply the surplus, dividends and annual produce " in the relief of poor persons who have been patients in the said Leicester Infirmary or Fever House, in such manner and under such regulations as the trustees for the time being of the said Sutton Charity may think fit, subject nevertheless to the following rulfls, namely," &c., &c. "...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL v DELANEY. [Exchequer.]
...L. R. 12 Eq. 574. In re WilkinsonENR 1 Cr. M. & R. 142. The Attorney-General v. NashENR 1 M. & W. 237, 244. Harris v. Earl HoweENR 29 Beav. 261. In re ParkerENR 4 H. & N. 666. The Attorney-General v. HopeUNK Ir. R. 2 C. L. 368. University of London v. YarrowENR 24 Beav. 472. The Attorney-Ge......
-
Weale v Ollive
...gift, and that it was therefore simply inoperative ; Boss v. Ross (1 Jae. & W. 154); fFtttiams v. Lamas (16 Beav. 1); Henderson v. Cross (29 Beav. 261); Holmes v. Godson (8 De G. M. & G. 116); Hughes v. Ellis (20 Beav. 193); G-reen v. Harvey {1 Hare, 428). [423] Mr. Baggallay and Mr. Schomb......
-
Lechmere v Clamp
...386 ; 2 Bacon's Abr. 482, tit. "Felo de se ; " 4 Viner's Abr. 268, tit. "Blood, corrupted," A., pi. 2 ; Haley v. Petit, Plowd. 253, 261. 29BEAV.261. HARRIS V. EARL HOWE 627 be served out of the jurisdiction, though nothing to that effect was stated in the General Orders. He asked, in the al......