Craft v. Executors of Snook
Opinion of the Court
The hill in this case is filed to obtain a judicial construction of the will of Enoch Snook, late of the county of Mercer, deceased.
The testator, among other legacies and provisions of
The general principle has been long and well settled, that when the “interest” or “produce” of a fund is bequeathed to a legatee, or in trust for him, without any limitation as to continuance, the principal will be regarded as bequeathed also. Elton v. Sheppard, 1 Brown’s C. C. 532; Philipps v. Chamberlaine, 4 Vesey 51; Page v. Leapingwell, 18 Vesey 463; Stretch v. Watkins, 1 Madd. 253; Clough v. Wynne, 2 Madd. 188; Adamson v. Armitage, 19 Vesey 416; Earl v. Grim, 1 Johns. Ch. R. 494; 2 Williams on Ex’rs (3d Am. ed.) 1027.
There is nothing on the face of the will in question to indicate a different intention. On the contrary, unless this construction be adopted, the testator died intestate as to the bulk of his property. He bequeathed not the principal, but the interest money, of a large portion of his estate. Such obviously was not his intention.
The executors are entitled to their costs, as they have merely sought, for their security, to have the construction of the will settled.
If the parties agree as to the amount now due upon the respective legacies there is no need of a reference, otherwise let it be referred to a master to take an account.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.