Salmon v Salmon

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date11 July 1860
Date11 July 1860
CourtHigh Court of Chancery

English Reports Citation: 54 E.R. 535

ROLLS COURT.

Salmon
and
Salmon

29BEAV.27. SALMON V. SALMON 535 [27] salmon v. salmon. July 11, 1860. A testator directed his executors to raise a legacy "to or in trust for his son." It was to be invested in the names of trustees, and life annuities were given to the son and his wife out of the income, and interests were given to the children of the son and to their issue, with gifts over. Held, that there was an absolute gift to the son cut down to the limited extent of the subsequent gifts. A testator bequeathed a legacy to his son, and after his decease and on the youngest of the son's sons attaining twenty-one, to divide it equally between the son's sons and the issue of deceased son's sons who should attain twenty-one, the issue to take the share which their father would have taken if living. Whether the gift after the sou's death is wholly void, or only as to the share of the issue, quoin. The testator bequeathed his chattels real and personal estate to trustees, upon trust, that they should thereout raise and pay several legacies amounting to .12,792, and in the next place " should raise, out of the said chattels real and residuary personal estate, or the produce thereof, the four following legacies or sums of money, which, in case of a deficiency in his assets, should abate proportionably (that is to say) to his son George Salmon the sum of 3900, to or in trust for his son Henry Salmon the sum of 6000, and two other legacies to two other children. Provided also, that such legacy of ,6000, given to or in trust for his son Henry Salmon, should be placed out at interest, in the names of his executors and in the name of some other person to be named by Henry Salmon, if he should be living and chose to make such nomination, on such securities as thereinafter mentioned, and that such his executors and trustees, out of such interest, should pay unto his sou Henry Salmon yearly, during his life, an annuity of 148, and unto Eliza Salmon, the wife of Henry Salmon, an annuity of 50 for her life, and in case Eliza Salmon should die, leaving Henry Salmon surviving her, then in trust to pay him a further annuity of 50. And in trust, out of the 6000 and the interest thereof, to pay and apply any sum or suma of money for the maintenance, clothing, education [28] at any university or elsewhere, advancement or preferment in profession or trade, or for the benefit or intended benefit of any son or sous, whether a minor or minors or of full age, of Henry Salmon, by his then present or any future wife, from time to time and at any time during the natural life of Henry Salmon, or after his decease, until such time as every one of such his sons who should be living should have attained the age of twenty-one years, and at the sole and unlimited discretion of the said trustees or trustee for the time being; such maintenance, sustenance or education to be with the said father or mother, or with his the said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Watkins v Weston
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 4 March 1863
    ...and that they passed to her representatives; In re Corbett's Trusts (Johns. 591); Norman v. Kynaston (29 Beav. 96); Salman v. Salmon (29 Beav. 27); Newland v. Shephard (2 Peere Wms. 194): Knight v. tielby (2 Mac. & Gor. 92 3 Scott (N. S.), 400); Jackson v. Noble (2 Keen, 590); WTitttell v. ......
  • Coombe v Hughes
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 27 January 1865
    ...Hughes is that person, and she, therefore, is absolutely'entitled to the future income until the death of her husband ; Salmon v. Salmon (29 Beav. 27) ; Trickey v. Trickey (3 Myl. & K. 560); Whittell v. Dudin (2 Jac. & W. 279); and see Kampfv. Jones (2 Keen, 756); Carver v. Bowles (2 Russ. ......
  • Re Graham's Will
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 18 April 1864
    ...direction to the trustee to pay her the dividends; this is a gift of the capital; Campbell v. Brownrigg (1 Phil. 301); Salmon v. Salmm (29 Beav. 27). Mr. Mounsey, contrh, argued that this was a distinct gift to Mary Graham for her life only, and that nothing followed in the will tending to ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT