(2) That when the marriage is known, the donor has the data upon which to base an intelligent judgment as to the propriety of creating the trust. This reason, it is submitted, loses its force when it is remembered that the trust has for its object the protection of the woman against the uncertainties which attend every marriage, however auspicious. (3) That as the sole and separate estate is one in which the cestui que trust has no powers except those granted, it is necessary to restrict the persons for whom such an estate may be created, for if the estate could be settled upon every single woman, the free alienation of property and the transmission of title would thereby be most seriously embarrassed. This reason, however, is of no weight when assigned in a jurisdiction like Pennsylvania, where, if anywhere, the restrictions upon alienation which may be created are allowed to the greatest extent, and is inconsistent with that assigned by Mr. Chief Justice Gibson.* 2 Sterrett, J., in Snyder's App., 92 Pa. 504 at 509 (1880). 3 Clark, J., in Quin's Est., 144 Pa. 444 at 455 (1891). 4 There appears to be no discussion in the books at the time the doctrine was established as to the reason why the woman should be married or in contemplation of marriage except in the opinion of Smyser, P. J., in the court below, in Dubs v. Dubs, 31 Pa. 149 at 151 (1858). In that case the Supreme Court seemed to think that the other view was the English view, and, for that reason alone, viewed it with disfavor. Contingent gift depending on the accumulation, how limited §620 General distinction between English and Pennsylvania acts §624 $625 The act considered in connection with the rule forbidding restraints on alienation. . . . . $626 The act considered in connection with the rule against per Levy's Estate... $637 Summary and statement of Pennsylvania law.. $639 Must the interest of the minor be vested for the direc Act does not render direction to accumulate void in toto... §644 Proviso as to minority..... $645 Direction to accumulate for the payment of debts... §646 Direction to accumulate for the improvement of real estate... §647 Direction to accumulate by deed.... 8648 Vested gift to a charity with subsidiary direction to ac- $656 Act limiting amount to be held by charitable corporations §657 ACCUMULATIONS IN THE INTEREST OF JUDICIOUS MANAGEMENT Discussion of the so-called doctrine of accumulations in the Inaccuracy of statement that the accumulation is void.... §683 Where the direction is subsidiary to the gift of the income Distribution of income directed to be accumulated for a charity Accumulations Defined and Analyzed 615. An accumulation as used in this discussion, is a retaining or heaping up of the income of property, and this may occur in one of three ways: (1) where the owner of property who is sui juris himself saves his income; with this the law does not undertake to deal, and it requires no further discussion.1 (2) Under some policy of law, where the owner of 1 As the accumulation in this case takes place as to a vested interest it cannot violate the rule against perpetuities, and as it continues by the voluntary act of the party entitled to the income, it does not amount to a restraint on either alien property is incapacitated from taking care of the income himself, as where he is a minor, a lunatic, or an habitual drunkard.2 (3) Where the owner of property, by will or deed, settles the property in such manner that there is an accumulation of the income thereafter accruing. The last case is the subject of the discussion in this chapter. Such an accumulation must necessarily result because of some direction in the instrument of gift. These directions may be of two kinds, implied or express. 3 Preliminary Discussion of Implied Directions to Accumulate 616. An implied direction to accumulate income exists when the limitations in the settlement are such that there is no one who has a present right to the property producing the income. In some of these cases, the court has adopted a rule of construction that the settlor intended the income to accumulate ation or use and enjoyment. As there is no other principle of law applicable to such accumulation, it is limited only by the voluntary wish of the party entitled. 2 An accumulation taking place under some rule or policy of the law is not strictly within the scope of this book. It will be proper, however, to give the subject some attention in passing. A minor is incapacitated by law from alienating his estate or spending the income thereof, and so much as is not necessary for hiseducation and maintenance must be accumulated by his guardian or the trustee of the estate until he arrives at the age of twenty-one. Such accumulation is directed by law and of common occurrence. The error of Lord Eldon in Griffiths v. Vere, 9 Ves. Jr., 127 (1803), in saying that it was directed by the court, was pointed out by Lord Cranworth in Tench v. Cheese, 6 DeG. M. G., 453 at 463 (1855), quoted in Scott on Accumulations §103. An accumulation may take place for several generations, as where several successive owners of an estate die under age, each leaving an heir or person entitled who is also under age. In all these cases there can be no doubt that the income will be accumulated during the successive minorities; Griffiths v. Vere, supra. The surplus income of a lunatic or habitual drunkard is, in like manner, subject to accumulation in the hands of his committee; see article, The Surplus Income of a Lunatic, Russel and Hale 8 Harv. Law Rev. 472-493 (1895). 3 It is important to notice that accumulations may exist, without any direction to that effect, from the circumstances of the case; as where the income accumulates in the hands of an executor or administrator, pending proceedings upon his account on appeal; from the fact that the party entitled to the income permits it to remain in the hands of the trustees or the trustees retain it through negligence or breach of trust; and also where the income accumulates because the party entitled is absent and unheard of, and cannot be found to receive payment. The student will therefore observe that the difference is not in the accumulations themselves but in the cause of their existence. An accumulation as such is not therefore necessarily unlawful. It may or may not be unlawful; see §683, post. |