¶1 This case is within the decision in Richardson v. Bowen, 18 R. I. 138, and is even stronger than that case in the evidence of an intention to give power to the trustees to apply the principal of the trust estate to the monthly payments. An express power to sell is here given, “in case the personal estate of said trust shall not be sufficient to satisfy the payments required by the provisions of my will aforesaid.” The provision for a larger sum to be paid to the daughters, in case of necessity, also seems to imply an intention to give them the sum of fifty dollars per month in any event. The claim of the complainants that the word ‘ ‘ payments ” refers only to legacies and payments other than payments to be made by the trustees at stated *586 intervals, seems to be too narrow for the provisions of the will, and we see no warrant in its language for such limitation. The argument that the trust estate may thus be exhausted is one that applies to every case of a deficiency of income. The intention of the testator is the test of construction, and it clearly appears that the intention was that the daughters should receive the sum named for life. We are of the opinion that the will authorizes the trustees to apply the principal to such payment, if necessary.
19 R.I. 584
35 A 302
Tiffany v. Munroe
Decided July 21, 1896
Supreme Court of Rhode Island · decided 1896-07-21
Bill in Equity for an injunction. Heard, on pleadings and proofs.
Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently February 2015
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relies on Richardson v. Bowen
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1896-07-21
View the full empirical analysis of this case →