This action presents on its face several, peculiar features.
The defendant holds a fund in trust for the separate use- and maintenance of the plaintiff, Mrs. Priscilla Walker,, during her life, and then for her children and their representatives. The complaint, without an allegation that the-fund is unsafe in the hands of the defendant, demands that, the fund shall be paid over to the children, on the ground,., “ that owing to the casualties of the war and other causes,, the plaintiffs, who- are the children of said Priscilla, are greatly in need of funds; and the plaintiff, Priscilla, is desirous that they should now have the use of the fund, and is desirous that the same be paid over now to her children, instead of waiting until her death; and the other plaintiffs are desirous to take the fund, and if the Court requires it, they are willing to enter into bond to pay to the said Priscilla the interest, or exhibit to the Court her release to them for the ■ same, which she is ready to give.”
Here we have an instance of an unblushing attempt on the part of the children and sons-in-law of a weak old woman to get the sanction of the Court to a surrender of all her estate and her' only means of maintenance, and thereby to subject herself to the tender mercy of the plaintiffs, who, “ owing to the casualties of the war are greatly in need of' funds.”
The defendant does not object to being relieved of the trust fund, and submits to an account. The plaintiffs except, for that the master has allowed the defendant credit for expenses of the plaintiff Priscilla, exceeding the annual interest of the fund.
If this exception be made in the name of the plaintiff, Priscilla, the reply is, as the expenditure was made at her-■ *366instance and request, she has no right to complain. If it be jrnade in the name of her children and sons-in-law, the reply is, wait until your time comes. It may be, that the annual ■interest now accruing, by the time Mrs. Walker dies, by prudent administration, will enable the trustee to balance the ..account.
There was no error in overruling the exception. A fur- . ther exception was taken, for that the defendant is allowed credit for the price of the negro woman “ Vice,” which was •lost to the fund by reason of emancipation.
This purchase was made at the express request of Mrs. •Walker, and had the full concurrence of her sons-in-law .and children ; so the objection comes with an ill grace from ■them, “their mouths are shut.” There was no error in overruling the exception. On confirming the report no decree (or judgment, as wre now call it,) is entered.
From “the looseness of pleading ” we are not able to say what judgment his Honor was about to pronounce except for the fact that his mouth -was shut by the appeal.
This opinion will be certified, to the end that judgment may be entered dismissing the action as upon a demurrer in respect to Priscilla Walker, because she shows no cause of action, and in respect to the other plaintiffs because they have no interest in the fund until after the death of said Priscilla, and the consent on her part to surrender the life estate in favor of her children, is not based upon any valuable consideration and is not entitled to the sanction of the Court.
Besides the principle that a Court of Equity will not en: force a voluntary executory agieement, there is in this case •the further difficulty, the slave of a feme covert, should the husband die before the termination of the life estate, will devolve upon the wife, if she be surviving; if not, then upon her child or children. So the sons-in-law of Mrs. Walker have no present vested interest in the fund, which *367■■may be endangered if allowed to pass into their possession ‘with the sanction of the Court.
Complaint dismissed.