This case has been thoroughly presented by counsel and has received our careful consideration. But nothing could profitably he added to the opinion of the learned judge below. We concur in his conclusion, and think he adequately sustained it. Ballantine v. Ballantine (C. C.) 152 Fed. 775. The contention that a bequest to executors, in trust to pay the income to a son until such time as *928they think proper to pay him the principal, entitles the son to demand the principal immediately, or on reaching his majority, has been strongly urged, and is not wholly unsupported by judicial decision; but there are decisions likewise to the contrary, and we are of opinion that, in the absence of binding authority, the position taken by the Circuit Court should be upheld.

The decree is affirmed.

On Rehearing.

This cause came on to be further heard on the suggestion and agreement of counsel hereto annexed. On consideration whereof, it is now here ordered, adjudged, and decreed by this court that the decree of the said Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby modified, so that the first paragraph thereof shall read as follows:

“That the bill be and the same is hereby dismissed, without prejudice to complainants’ rights to hereafter claim that the trust as to the last one-fifth of George A. Ballantine’s share will cease upon the death of testator’s widow.”

And it is further ordered that the decree of the said Circuit Court for the District of New Jersey, as thus modified, be and the same is hereby affirmed. And it is further ordered that the appellants pay the costs in this court.