Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

1851.-Wilson v. Wilson.

read the act as if it had restrained accumulation beyond periods A, B, C and D; not reading the word "or" in its ordinary disjunctive sense, but as a copulative. This, however, is taking a liberty with language which, I apprehend, is never done, certainly not in modern times, where there is nothing in the context showing that to have been the sense in which the word has been used. It is admitted that there is no authority directly in point; but, in the absence of direct authority, I think the observations of Lord Eldon, in Griffiths v. Vere, are entitled to very great weight. The scope of his observations there was, that, in spite of the act, accumulation might go on, partly under the act and partly under the general principles of law, for nearly double the period of twenty-one years; and he adds, though the legislature did not mean that; that is, though the legislature has, by enactment, restricted accumulation to a period of twenty-one years from the death of the testator, yet general *princi- [*300] ples of law may carry it through a far longer period. This surely is very strong to show that Lord Eldon's opinion. was that the statutable accumulation, if it may be so designated, must have stopped at the end of twenty-one years; otherwise, he would have pointed out the subsequent accumulations which, according to the argument before me, might go on, consistently with the statute, for a succession of minorities after the expiration of twenty-one years. I must, however, add that I do not found my judgment on that case. I proceed entirely on these consid. erations: that the ordinary grammatical construction of the act restricts the accumulation to one only of the allowed periods; that there is nothing on the face of the act showing that the ordinary construction of the words is not to be adopted, and that such a construction leads to no absurdity or inconsistency. I am, therefore, of opinion that the direction to accumulate during the minority of the son, and the subsequent gift of the fund so accumulated, are void; and, therefore, that the annual produce during such minority is undisposed of, and goes to the next of kin.[1]

[1] By the Revised Statutes of New York, Vol. II, 4th ed., pages 183 and 184, the absolute ownership of personal property shall not be suspended by any limitaVOL. I.-N. S.

17

1851.-King of the Two Sicilies v. Willcox.

tion or condition whatever, for a longer period than during the continuance and un. til the termination of not more than two lives in being at the date of the instrument containing such limitation or condition; or if such instrument be a will, for not more than two lives in being at the death of the testator. An accumulation of the interest of money, the produce of stock or other income or profits arising from personal property, may be directed by any instrument sufficient in law to pass such personal property, as follows: if the accumulation be directed to commence from the date of the instrument, or from the death of the person executing the same, such accumulation must be directed to be made for the benefit of one or more minors then in being, or in being at such death, and to terminate at the expiration of their minority; if the accumulation be directed to commence at any period subsequent to the date of the instrument, or subsequent to the death of the person executing such instrument, it must be directed to commence within the time allowed in the first section of this title for the suspension of the absolute ownership of personal property, and at some time during the minority of the persons for whose benefit it is intended, and must terminate at the expiration of their minority; and all directions for the accumulation of the interest, income or profit of personal property, other than such as are herein allowed, shall be void; but a direction for an accumulation, in either of the cases specified in the last section, for a longer term than the minority of the persons intended to be benefited thereby, shall be void only as respects the time beyond such minority. See Vail v. Vail, 4 Paige's Ch. R., page 317-327.

[*301] *THE KING OF THE TWO SICILIES v. WILLCOX.

Production of Documents.-Principal and Agent.-Defendant.— Discovery.

1851 16th and 31st January.

During a revolution in Sicily, the revolutionary government sent two of the defendants, who were natives and inhabitants of Sicily, as envoys to this country, and afterwards remitted to them moneys, which had been contributed by many thousands of the inhabitants of Sicily, with directions to purchase a steam-ship therewith; and the defendants applied the moneys accordingly. The lawful sovereign of Sicily, after he had re-established his authority, filed a bill, claiming the ship, which still remained in the port of London. The defendants, in their answer, admitted the possession of documents relating to the matters in the bill, but said that they held them as the agents and on the behalf of the persons who intrusted them with the moneys, and submitted that, in the absence of such persons, they ought not to be ordered to produce the documents.

The court, however, made the order, because the plaintiff represented the contribu tors of the moneys; and the revolutionary government being at an end, the de

1851.-King of the Two Sicilies v. Willcox.

fendants had either ceased to be agents or trustees for any one, or had become agents or trustees for the plaintiff.

Production of Documents.-Defendant.-Discovery.-Penalties.

A defendant, a foreigner sojourning in this country, declined to produce documents, because they would expose him to criminal prosecution in his own country; but the court made the order.

Defendant.-Witness.

A defendant or witness, if interrogated as to matters tending to criminate him, may decline to answer at any time, notwithstanding what he has disclosed may be sufficient to convict him. The decision in Ewin v. Osbaldiston, 6 Sim. 608, disapproved of.

THE bill was filed in December, 1849, against the Peninsular and Oriental Steam-packet Company and L. Scalia, and F. M. Granatelli and certain other persons. It stated, among other things, that in the early part of 1848, certain person, subjects of the plaintiff, usurped the plaintiff's authority and regal functions, and established, in Palermo, a government constituted of the plaintiff's subjects, which assumed the administration of public affairs in Sicily, and continued to exercise *it un- [*302] til April, 1849; that the usurping government seized the plaintiff's royal public treasury in Palermo, and took possession of all the moneys therein, and of all moneys which were paid into the same, being part of the plaintiff's royal revenues, thenceforwards until April, 1849: that, shortly before July, 1848, the ministers of the usurping government appointed Granatelli and Scalia, both of whom were the plaintiff's subjects, to be their agents in England; and Granatelli and Scalia proceeded to England as such agents; and, shortly before, or at the beginning of July, 1848, they, by the direction and on the behalf of the usurping government, entered into a contract with the Peninsular and Oriental Steam-packet Company for the purchase of two steamships, one of which was built and nearly completed, and the other was being built; and that such contract was reduced into writing, and dated the 1st of July, 1848, and was signed by the secretary of the company on behalf of the company, and by Grana

1851.-King of the Two Sicilies v. Willcox.

telli and Scalia; and Granatelli and Scalia, who were therein described as commissioners for the Sicilian Government, thereby agreed to buy, and the Steam-packet Company thereby agreed to sell, the steam-ship called the Vectis, built at Cowes, for 45,000l., and another steam-ship, which was then being built for the company at Northfleet, and was afterwards called the Bombay, for 60,000l., to be paid by certain instalments, the second instalment to be paid when the two steam-vessels should be completed for sea, so far as related to the company, in the same state as contracted for by the builders; and any alterations required, by the purchasers, for war purposes, were to be made by them at their own expense: that, in the margin of the contract, was written the following memorandum :-" It is stipulated by the contracting parties, that this agreement is subject to ratification by the Sicilian Government, in all July [*303] *current:" That the usurping government was in

formed of the contract, and, on the 20th of July, 1818, declared that it ratified the same; that Granatelli and Scalia having been informed of such ratification, a memorandum was, on the 7th of August, 1848, endorsed on the contract and signed by them and by the secretary to the Steam-packet Company on behalf of the company, in the following words:-"The Sicilian Government having, under date Palermo, the 20th of July, 1848, ratified the within agreement, the same is now declared to be valid and in full force. London, 7th August, 1848." That by the words "The Sicilian Government" was meant (as the Steampacket Company well knew) the persons who had usurped the plaintiff's authority, and were then assuming and exercising the offices and functions of his ministers: that the Bombay had since been so far completed as to be ready for sea; that, in the latter part of July and in August, 1848, the usurping government, and persons for the time being acting under the alleged authority thereof, from time to time, applied divers sums of the plaintiff's revenues, being moneys paid into his royal public treasury at Palermo of which they had taken possession as aforesaid, in purchasing or procuring bills of exchange, for the express purpose of such bills being remitted to England, and applied towards completing the purchase of the steam-ships; and the persons for

1851.-King of the Two Sicilies v. Willcox.

the time being acting under the alleged authority of such government, procured such bills to be so made out or indorsed as to be payable to the order of Granatelli and Scalia; and the persons acting under such alleged authority remitted the same bills to Granatelli and Scalia, with directions to apply the same towards completing the purchase of the steam-ships; and they received such bills, and applied the same, or the amount thereof,

in paying, to the Steam-packet Company, *(who well [*304] knew how and whence the said money was obtained,) the instalments payable under the contract and certain other sums in respect of the purchase; that the Steam-packet Company delivered the Vectis to Granatelli and Scalia, or to certain officers and sailors employed by them; and the same ship was, pursuant to directions given by Granatelli and Scalia as agents of the usurping government, taken away, in March, 1849, from England to, and the same had ever since remained in parts beyond the seas; that the Bombay had, ever since the building thereof was completed, been and still was in the port of London, and the same remained, until May, 1849, in the possession or under the power of the Steam-packet Company: that in April, 1849, the plaintiff's lawful authority was re-established in Sicily, and the plaintiff had thenceforth continued in the undisturbed exercise of such authority: that moneys taken from the plaintiff's royal public treasury at Palermo, and which belonged to the plaintiff as such sovereign as aforesaid, and bills, purchased or procured with such moneys, having been, with the knowledge of the Steampacket Company, applied in or towards paying the purchasemoney for the Vectis and the Bombay, the plaintiff became entitled to require the delivery to him of the same ships, and was still entitled to have the Bombay delivered to him: that the Steampacket Company entered into the contract for the sale of the steam-ships, with full notice and knowledge that Granatelli and Scalia were acting therein on behalf of the usurping government; and the same company received all payments made to them respect of the purchase-money for the same ships, with full noti and knowledge that such payments were made with or b means of moneys taken out of the plaintiff's royal public treas ury at Palermo, and belonging to the plaintiff as such sover

« ElőzőTovább »