deposits, she declared that "she was going to put the money in the bank for the children." It did not appear who the statement was made to, or whether the children or anyone interested knew of the deposits. Held, that the moneys deposited were completed gifts which she had no desire to countermand, and that the donees were entitled to the money. The control of the deposits retained by the depositor, was a control for the benefit of the children, the same as a guardian depositing money of his ward would retain control of it, and for the protection of the donees, and not such control as would leave a locus pænitentia in the donor. Gardner v. Merritt, 32 Md. 78. See, however, Taylor v. Henry, 48 Md. 550, where the fact of the supposed donor retaining control of the fund was considered as evidence to prove that no gift was intended. In this case the money was deposited in the joint names of both parties.

Two savings bank books were left by A B at his death, one of which stood in his own name, and the other in the name of "JB order of A B." JB was A B's son. On the last page of both books were orders signed by A B directing the treasurer of the bank to pay the balance on each book to J B at the decease of A B. The books were left with the treasurer. A B had access to them, and other sums were deposited and drawn out by him. JB never had possession of the books, and had no knowledge of them during his father's life. Held, not to constitute a valid gift of the money represented by the books. Burton v. Bridgeport Savings Bank, 52 Conn. 398.

died four years later, leaving a will in which no allusion was made to the deposit, and nothing was given to W. Held, by a majority of the court, that she made a complete gift of the money to W at the time of the deposit, and could not afterwards revoke it. The money was recovered from her estate. Minor v. Rogers, 40 Conn. 512.

Possession by a stranger of a savings bank book in the name of another constitutes no evidence of a right to draw the funds, and without more does not justify the bank in paying; although a by-law of the bank says that all payments made on presentation of the book will be binding on the depositor. Smith v. Brooklyn Savings Bank, 101 N. Y. 58; s. c., 54 Am. Rep. 653.

Where, after one's death, savings bank books are found among his effects, showing deposits in the names of different persons, in the absence of evidence of the sources from which the money was derived, the claims of those interested must be determined by the names on the books. Gaffney v. Public Administrator, 4 Dem. (N. Ÿ.) 22.

A delivery to a donee of a savings bank book, with an intent to give the donee the deposits represented thereby, is a good delivery, and vests an equitable title to such deposits in the donee, without an assignment, though by the rules of the bank the money can only be withdrawn or transferred by the depositor to his administrator, or by some person presenting the book, accompanied by an order signed by the depositor in the presence of an attesting witness. Hill v. Stevenson, 63 Me. 364.

F informed the treasurer of a savings bank that she desired to make a deposit for each of four grandchildren, naming B as one, to which she proposed to make additions from time to time, and expressed the hope that with the accumulated interest, the deposits might amount to enough to be of advantage to them when they should reach a suitable age to take charge of the money. She wanted "to do something for the children." The treasurer gave her pass books in the names of each of the grandchildren, and entered in each, and in the bank books, "subject to the order of F during her lifetime." Subsequently she informed B of what she had done, and that the money was intended for him and the other children, and she made other deposits and withdrew one dividend. Afterwards F took

A widow with a considerable estate and no children, deposited in a savings bank $250 in her own name as trustee for W, who was a boy 13 years old, whose parents were near neighbors and friends, and who was accustomed to do errands for her, being almost daily at her house for that purpose, she often giving him presents in return. Shortly after making the deposit, she told the boy's parents that she had deposited that amount in the bank for him, and again alluding to it, said that W would need the money for his education. She kept the book herself, and two years thereafter drew out a part of the money, and a year later drew out the balance with accrued interest, signing receipts in her own name and appropriating the money to her own use. She

the several books to the bank and informed the treasurer “that the time had come when she desired to make such a change in the terms of the deposits made for her grandchildren .

as would give them full control over them, and the amounts on each book become the absolute property of the parties named therein, and her right to control them should cease. Her expressed wish was, that her claim over the amount of the deposits should be withdrawn as to each case, and the books so changed that they would stand in the names of the grandchildren,without any restriction whatever," and the treasurer then and there, at her request, erased from the pass books and bank books the original entry, "subject to the order of F." She notified B by letter of this change, and that the pass books would be delivered the first time they met. B replied with the request that the books might be sent to him. A short time before F's death she delivered the pass books to W. A. F., with a written order to enable him to draw the amount of each deposit. Held, (1) That the deposit in the first instance created a valid trust, and that F controlled the same in trust for B. (2) That the acts and declarations of F at the time of the change in the entry upon the books show a complete and executed gift, and divested F of any interest in the deposit as trustee or otherwise, and that she thereafter held the pass book in trust for B. (3) That, as Ŵ. A. F. subsequently took the book without consideration, and with full knowledge of the plaintiff's prior title, he took it subject to that trust, and that it is necessary to B for the more beneficial enjoyment of his gift. Barker v. Frye (in equity), 75 Me. 29.

B, the plaintiff's executor, deposited $Soo in the defendant savings bank in the name of C, but payable to himself. He took a deposit book, which he kept and controlled. He withdrew a little more than half of it, and in a few months directed the treasurer of the bank to add to the first entry, "Payable to S. Barlow," so as to make it read, "Payable to S. Barlow, during his life, and after his death to Marion Cushing." B made his will before the deposit, in which was this provision: "I hereby confirm all gifts I have made or shall make to any of my children." C was a grandchild. It did not appear that B did or said anything else in relation to the deposit, or that indicated an

intention to hold the pass book in trust for C. A by-law printed in the pass book provided that no deposit could be withdrawn without the production of the book. The bank had no communication with C, and understood that B was the depositor, and so treated him. Chad no knowledge of the transaction. Held:

1. There was no delivery, no acceptance, and therefore the deposit could not be sustained as a gift inter vivos.

2. The bank did not hold the money as trustee for C.

3. The donor did not declare himself a trustee, and did nothing equivalent to that; hence, there was no trust relation between him and the claimant. Pope v. Burlington Savings Bank, 56 Vt. 284; s. c., 48 Am. Rep. 781.

Where A deposited money in a savings bank in the name of B without a declaration of trust at the time, or subsequently, and retained the deposit book in his possession until his death, held that, in the absence of proof of any act or declaration under the pressure of immediate or impending death, or of proof of any delivery, or intent to give, the deposit in the bank in B's name belonged to A's estate and not to B. Robinson v. Ring, 72 Me. 140; s. c., 39 Am. Rep. 308.

R deposited a sum of money in a savings bank in the name of her nephew N, with a memorandum that the deposit can be paid to R. She retained the deposit book in her possession and drew out the dividends and part of the principal during her lifetime. At her death, the deposit book was passed to the administrator. Held, in a suit in equity by N against the administrator of R, for the amount of the deposit at R's death, that that evidence aliunde as to the intention of R in making the deposit is admissible to vary the effect of the entries in the deposit book. Northrop v. Hall, 72 Me. 275.

H deposited a sum of money in a savings bank in the name of E, "subject to the order of H." A few days afterward H asked E to come to his house, showed him the deposit book, said he was going to give it to him, and delivered it temporarily into his possession. H then said he would keep the book for E, as he had a safe, and took it and put it into the safe. On the same day, by E's request, H signed and delivered to E a paper certifying that the money was for him. H never drew the interest upon

a present gift, though he retains the Smith v. Bank (N. H.), 9

bank book. Atl. Rep. 792.

Mere evidence that A stated to B that he, A, had given his wife a savings deposit and bank book, and that it was hers, held insufficient without proof of delivery to establish a gift. With delivery of the book it would have been a perfect gift. Hoar v. Hoar, 5 Redf. (N. Y.) 637

A deposited money in the defendant savings bank in the name of B. A retained the book till his death and it was

found among his papers. It did not appear that B knew of the gift, she having died previous to A's decease. Held, a perfect gift. Howard v. Savings Bank, 40 Vt. 597.

A, with intent to make a gift to his two sons, R and J, delivered to each of them a check on a savings bank, payable four days after his death. He stated that he wanted to control the money as long as he lived in order to collect the interest. He delivered the pass books to R, telling him he would need them in order to draw the money, and he did not think them safe where they were and wanted R to take care of them. Held, that the transaction did not constitute a valid gift. The delivering of the checks did not transfer the funds,nor did the delivering of the pass books, as the decedent did not part with his control of them. Curry v. Powers, 70 N. Y. 212.

A

A B deposited in a savings bank a sum of money belonging to her in the name of "A B, trustee for C D," and always retained the pass book. CD did not know of the deposit till after the death of A B. A by-law of the bank provided that no one should receive his deposit without producing his book. suit was brought against C D, in which the bank was summoned as trustee and the administrator of A B's estate appeared as claimant. Held, that the administrator was entitled to the money as against the plaintiff. The plaintiff offered evidence to prove the intent of A B to create a trust in favor of CD, but the court held that such evidence was rightfully excluded, as if such intent was established she did not do what was necessary to carry the intent into effect. Clark. v. Clark, 108 Mass. 522.

dence of a gift beyond the fact that he once said he would have no more to do with it. Held, the deposit was not hers. Schick v. Grote, 47 N. J. Eq. 352.

Where a deposit in a savings bank, made by one in his own name as trustee for another, continues in his own possession until his death, his personal representatives are entitled to it on his death, and not the person named as cestui que trust. If, however, the depositor intends money at time of deposit to be a gift to such other person, and declares the gift to him, and he assents to it, the gift is perfect, although he keeps the book himself. Alger v. North End Savings Bank (Mass.), 5 N. E. Rep. 893.

The fact that one deposits his money in a bank in another's name, but subject to the depositor's order, without notice to the other party, and retains control of the fund, does not amount to a gift of the money; nor is it sufficient evidence of an intention to create a trust. Marcy v. Amazeen, 61 N. H. 131.

A deposited money in a savings bank and received a pass book in which the amount was credited to B. The money belonged to A, who retained possession of the book. B died without having been informed of the fact of the deposit. Held, that A could compel B's administrator to draw out the money and pay it to A. Orr v. McGregor, 43 Hun (N. Y.) 528.

A deposited money in a savings bank "in trust" for certain relatives, and told them of it, saying he could control it while he lived, and that after his death it was theirs. Just before A died, he told those relatives to take the deposit books after his death and make the transfers. Held, that there was not a perfected gift, and that A's administrator was entitled to the money. Nutt v. Morse, 142 Mass. 1.

Life Insurance Policies.-The delivery of a policy of life insurance without a transfer or assignment will not carry with it a right to the funds, although it may possibly give a right to retain the policy itself. Bond v. Bunting, 78 Pa. St. 210; Rummens v. Hare, 1 Ex. D. 169.

A man insured his life and delivered the policy to his wife, on condition that she paid the premiums. She took the policy and paid the premiums out of her separate estate. He afterwards devised all his property to the plaintiff, who was his executrix, in trust for his children.

A husband deposited certain money in a savings bank in the joint names of himself and wife. There was no proof of a delivery of the book, and no evi