14
j
(13348)
This is a curious case.
14531
RECE
REGE 21 APR 1
378
I have no doubt that the
trust, which Ford thought he had created, was vold for
indefiniteness.
He has employed the actual words of
the gift, which was held void on that ground in the case
ne
of Ellis versus Selby (1 Mylug and Craig p.286) a
decision of Lord Cottenham L.C. sitting as a Court of
Appeal.
Even had the trust not been void for indefinite-
ness, it would in so far as the fund consisted of land
(whether freehold or leasehold) have been void under
the provisions of section 4 of the Mortmain and
Charitable User Act of 1888, which came into operation
on August 13th 1888 and at the date of Ford's death on
August 21st 1888 was presumably in force with respect
to the gift in his will, by virtue of Article V of the
China and Japan Order in Council 1865.
Mr. Keswick, the trustee under the will, did, I
think, in the events which happened, and having regard
to the time which has elapsed since Ford's death,
acquirel a perfectly good title to these lands under
the Statutes of Limitation (which applied in virtue of
Article V of the Order in Council to land in China gr
Japan