of the country in which the testator resides, and the will is made; and a legatee therefore of a will made in England, whose legacy is payable out of lands in C. 15 Ireland, will be entitled to have his legacy paid in English money without any charge of remittance.a So if a man in Jamaica gives some legacies to be paid in sterling money, and then one to A. generally, and afterwards several more to be paid in sterling money; the legacy to A. is of Jamaica money; and will be directed here to be computed according to the nominal current value, not the actual value, of the currency of that country.

A gift by a person in Antigua of a certain weight of sugar, to be paid in ten years after the testator's death, was decreed to be computed according to what was the medium rate of sugars in Antigua at the end of the ten years."

Sce imith In paying or retaining a legacy the executor is inden made answerable for certain duties imposed by the Jess 352 -Kallast stamp act, proportionably to the degree of relationship of the legatee to the testator. The payment of these however may be expressly provided for by the testator. Thus where the will directed the executors "to make payment of all the legacies without any deduction," it was held they must be paid withtout deduction of the duty. If the legacy is given f the duty! If the legacy is Adr. 359. Louch & Ilkay that the 484 2 of Shaftesbury 9 Sini 23%. Sanders. Hich sell of. 536. Gude throngs Manis Busto Phipps . E. Anglesea, I P. W. 696. Wallis v. Brightwell, 2 P. W. #Sm: 061. Ford Rusty 88. The currency however of the /lot. has. Broly two countries is now assimilated, 6 British Be Geo. IV. 79. $95.

56.

Saunders v. Drake, 2 Atk. 465. Pierson v. Garnet, 2 Bro. 38. Malcolm v. Martin, 3 Bro. 50.

a Symes v.Vernon, 2 Ver. 553. • 55 Geo. III. 184. See Appendix. f Barksdale v. Gilliat, 1 Swanst. 562. If the will directs the payment of the duty, no duty is chargeable on the money applicable to that purpose. 36 Geo. III. 52. 21. Appendix.

-making

free of duty, it is an increase of the legacy itself; and if that therefore is payable out of the real estate, the duty is also to be paid out of the same fund."

SECTION III.

Of Interest and Maintenance.

It is a general principle, that a legacy payable at h a given time, whether vested or not, does not carry. 2 yr at on interest till that time; for interest is given for delay of payment. A bequest therefore to A. to be paid at/4. twenty-one, does not carry interest during his minority, unless there is something on the face of the instrument, from whence it can be inferred that the testator considered interest as incident to the gift." Thus, where legacies were bequeathed contingently upon the legatees attaining twenty-one, and the testator gave his executors power during the minority of the legatees to lay out the money on securities for the purposes and on the trusts of his will, and to call it in, &c. : the legatees were held not entitled to interest; and Lord Hardwicke said, there could be no doubt unless for the last clause; but he did not take that to be a direction to lay out the money for the benefit of the particular legatees, but equally for the benefit of the residuary ones. So where a woman devised certain estates to A. for life, remainder to his first and other sons in tail, &c.; and, failing such issue, willed that the estates should stand charged

Noel v. L. Henley, 7 Pri. 241. b2 Atk. 329. 1 Ves. 307. 3 Ves. 16. 1 Sch. & Lef. 5. Att. Gen. v. Thompson, Pr. Ch. 337. 1 Eq. Ab. 301. Lloyd v. Williams, 2 Atk. 108.

Descrambes v. Tomkins, 4 Bro. 149.
N. 1 Cox, 133, Tyrrell v. Tyrrell,
4 Ves. 1. Birmingham v. Kirwan,
2 Sch. & Lef. 455.

Heath v. Perry, 3 Atk. 102.

with the payment of certain legacies, which should be raised and paid within six months after the death of A. without issue, and subject thereto to B. for life, &c.; provided that it should be lawful for A. to make any settlement of all or any part of the estates in jointure, &c.; and A. married, and settled the whole estate on his wife for her jointure, and died without issue: the legacies were decreed only to be paid with interest from the death of the jointress. A posthumous child also will only be entitled to interest from the time of his birth, although the testator has given interest on his legacies to be computed from the day of his death.

From the time however that a legacy becomes payable interest begins to run upon it, if not paid. Hence where 5007. was given without any interest to J. B., but in case it should not be claimed within five years, then the testator bequeathed the same sum of 500l. without interest as aforesaid to R. C.; and no claim was made by J. B.: the Master of the Rolls held that the words "without interest as aforesaid," ' were only intended so as to give no retrospective interest for the period of the five years, which were given to J. B.; and that interest was payable from the expiration of those five years, when the legacy became due. If no time of payment is mentioned in the will interest begins to accrue from the end of a year after the testator's death, notwithstanding there is a gift over in the event of the legatee dying under

a

Reynolds v. Meyrick, 1 Ed. 48. Rawlins v. Rawlins, 2 Cox, 425. • Palmer v. Trevor, 1 Ver. 261. Symes v. Vernon, 2 id. 553. Contra Knapp v. Powell, Pr. Ch. 11.

d Careless v. Careless, 1 Mer.

384. 19 Ves. 601.

2 Salk. 415. 2 Atk. 109. 1 Ves. 211. 1 Cox, 244. Maxwell v. Wettenhall, 2 P.W. 26. Bilson v. Saunders, Bunb. 240. Webster v. Hale, 8 Ves. 410.

age. For by a rule, that has been adopted for the sake of general convenience, the Court holds the personal estate to be reduced into possession within a year after the death of the testator, and to be making interest: actual payment may in many instances be impracticable within that time; yet in legal contemplation the right to payment exists, and carries with it the right to interest until actual payment. Thus where a fund did not come to be disposable for the payment of legacies till near forty years after the death of the testator, the legacies were held to bear interest from the year after his death. Hence also where a legacy was given to be paid out of money due on mortgage "when the same shall be recovered;" and the money was not received until more than three years after the death of the testator: these words were held not sufficient to postpone the right to interest until the money had

been recovered.d

e

A legacy charged on land only will carry interest from the death of the testator; and it is the same if it is given out of a reversionary interest; for a reversion is as capable of being sold or mortgaged as any other estate. Lune fum of hers a esce the primary from de sub com uftice Sestor's death It has been said also that if a legacy be given out

a

Taylor v. Johnson, 2 P.W. 504. Mos. 98. S. C. somewhat differently reported.

b 13 Ves. 333. 10 id. 333; but the executor may if he chooses pay legacies, or hand over the residue, within the year. 1 Sch. & Lef. 12. 1 Turn. 241.

26. Bilson v. Saunders, Bunb. 240. Spurway v. Glynn, 9 Ves. 483. Shirt v. Westby, 16 Ves. 393; and see 1 Sch. & Lef. 11. But a modern work (Prest. Leg. 283) considers this doctrine overruled, and cites Gibson v. Bott, 7 Ves. 97.

f Davies v. Davies, 1 Dan. 84; and see 2 Atk. 110. Contra Maxwell v. Wettenhall, 2 P.W. 26. See also Bacon v. Clerk, 1 P.W. 478. Hall v. Carter, 2 Atk. 354.

of personal estate, consisting of mortgages carrying interest, or of stocks yielding profits, the legacy shall carry interest from the death of the testator: but Lord Redesdale held, that the yielding profits made no difference; and that if the fund was productive within the twelve months, all the intermediate profits belonged to the residuary legatee; and Lord Eldon observes, the old doctrine is exploded now by every day's practice.

The interest of a contingent legacy until the event, upon which it is made payable, happens, is undisposed of, and falls into the residue. Hence 12tone when the residue itself is given on a contingency the • Ranism & interest must accumulate for the benefit of the person Sch. 715. who ultimately becomes entitled to that residue. But where it is bequeathed in words that confer a vested interest, and is liable only to be devested and given over to another upon a contingency, the intermediate profits as they accrue will belong to the first legatee. Thus where a man devised all the residue of his personal estate to his daughter F., to be paid to her at the age of twenty-one, and if she died under twenty-one, to such son of his daughter E. as should first attain the age of twenty-one; but if E. should have no such son, then over; and F. died an infant within half a year after the death of the

Trevanion v. Vivian, 2 Ves. 430. Bullock v. Stones, id. 521. Glanvill v. Glanvill, 2 Mer. 38; and see Hawkins v. Combe, 1 Bro. 335.

Tissen v. Tissen, 1 P. W. 500. Nicholls v. Osborn, 2 id. 419. Shepherd v. Ingram, Ambl. 448. Chaworth v. Hooper, 1 Bro. 82; and see Sisson v. Shaw, 9 Ves. 285. Montgomerie v. Woodley, 5 Ves. 522.