will properly provide for the two children of my deceased brother Simeon whom we have undertaken to raise and educate." Noe v. Kern (1887) 93 Mo. 367, 3 Am. St. Rep. 544, 6 S. W. 239. y. "Faith and confidence." No trust is created by the following provisions: "Having full faith and confidence in my beloved wife, and knowing that she will wisely and prudently manage the affairs of the family and look after the welfare of our children, and as a kind mother do them each and all justice, I, therefore, hereby give and bequeath to my said wife, Martha D. Stevens, all my estate, real, personal, and mixed of every name and description of which I may die seised, possessed, or to which I may become entitled at the time of my decease, the interest, rents, income, dividends, and profits thereof to be expended for her own use and support and for the maintenance and support of the home for herself and our children during her natural life." Lloyd v. Lloyd (1899) 173 Mass. 97, 53 N. E. 148. 2. "Hope" or "hoping." See also "Desire and hope;" "Expect and hope." In Civil v. Rich (1689) 1 Ch. Cas. 309, 22 Eng. Reprint, 815, the Lord Chancellor said: "He also remembered a case in the Lord Egerton's time, where one possessed of leases for years devised them to his wife and hoped she would leave them to his son, and died. Her second husband granted the leases away; the son sued to be relieved but was dismissed, for it was no trust for the son." Only precatory force is to be attributed to the words of a will by which the testator gave certain leasehold estates to his brother forever, "hoping he will continue them in the family," the objects of the request being uncertain. Harland v. Trigg (1782) 1 Bro. Ch. 142, 28 Eng. Reprint, 1041. The widow takes an absolute interest in property under a will by which her husband devised all his property to her, her heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, absolutely and forever, in the full assurance and confident hope that she would bring up his children in the fear of God, and educate and provide for them the same as would have been his intention had it pleased God to spare his life. Macnab v. Whitbread (1853) 17 Beav. 299, 51 Eng. Reprint, 1049. . . · No trust is created by a will by which testatrix gave all her property to her husband, "hoping that he will leave it after his death to my son if he is worthy of it," and further stated: "My reason for leaving all I have to dispose of to my husband and in his entire power is that my son is already certain of a handsome fortune independent of his father, and that I cannot now feel any certainty what sort of character he may become. I therefore leave it to my dear husband in whose honor, justice, and parental affection I have the fullest confidence," the words of confidence being rather weak, while the expressions giving control of the object of the gift are extremely strong. Eaton v. Watts (1867) L. R. 4 Eq. (Eng.) 151. aa. "Hoping and believing." No trust is created by a will by which testator devised a farm to his son and daughter equally, "to them, their heirs, and assigns forever, hoping and believing they will do justice hereafter to my grandson Hiram Van Duyne to the amount of one half of the said homestead farm." Van Duyne v. Van Duyne (1862) 14 N. J. Eq. 397, s. c. on appeal in (1863) 15 N. J. Eq. 503. bb. "Hope and expectation." See also "Expect and hope." No trust is created by a bequest of a sum of money to a sister of testatrix "to be hers absolutely; but with the hope and expectation and perfect faith that she will expend so much of the income and principal thereof if it should become necessary in the carrying on of a certain charity in which she knows I am deeply interested," the language being that of expectation, and there being an uncertainty in the object to be benefited and the subject to be affected. Seymour v. Sanford (1913) 86 Conn. 516, 86 Atl. 7. cc. "Hope and trust." No trust is created by a will by which testator gave and devised all his property to his brother, to be held, used, and enjoyed by him, his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns forever, "with the hope and trust, however, that he will not diminish the same to a greater extent than may be necessary for his comfortable support and maintenance, and that at his death the same, or so much thereof as he shall not have disposed of by devise or sale, shall descend to my three beloved nieces," it being clear that the testator intended that the devisee should have an absolute power of disposal. Howard v. Carusi (1883) 109 U. S. 725, 27 L. ed. 1089, 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 575. No trust is imposed by a will in which testator, after devising his property to his grandchildren, added: "And I admonish and charge my said grandchildren that this gift is made in the hope and upon the trust that they will provide for their parents during their lives." Arnold v. Arnold (1893) 41 S. C. 291, 19 S. E. 670. dd. "I am assured.” No binding obligation is created by a will in which testator, who had appointed a sum of money to his daughter, provided that, should such appointment prove invalid, then he appointed that the said sum should go and belong to his son Robert, "but who will, I am assured, settle the same voluntarily in the manner in which I have attempted to settle the same as aforesaid, so as thereby to carry out my wishes." Re Crawshay (1890) L. R. 43 Ch. Div. (Eng.) 615. ee. "I am anxious." An absolute estate, unqualified by any trust, is created by a will in which testator left all his property to his wife, notwithstanding his statement: "After her death I am anxious that the total amount which all said property, real and personal, shall bring, be divided amongst the family for the education of the children of those whom she shall before her death and by testament consider the most in need." Re Fortier (1922) 22 Ont. Week, N. 136. ff. "I leave to the discretion of." No trust is created by a provision of the will in which testator gave his wife an estate for life in certain property, that "after providing for her own wants and comforts, I leave to the discretion of my dear wife to give to such of my relations such aid or assistance as my dear wife may of her own will think proper and just." Corby v. Corby (1884) 85 Mo. 371. gg. "Instruct." A trust or charge for the education of testator's children is created by a will in which he gave the residue of his estate to his wife "to have and to hold till my youngest child is of age, then to be divided equally between her and her children by me living at the time, and I instruct her hereby to give each of them an equal education fitted to their station in life." Waldroop v. Waldroop (1920) 179 N. C. 674, 103 S. E. 381. hh. "Intention." See "Desire and intention;" "Will and intention." ii. "Invoke." No trust is created by a will in which testator, after a provision for his illegitimate children, declared that, if such provision should be declared void, then he gave one fourth of his estate to them and the other three fourths to his friend and executor, and appointed such friend his executor, concluding with the words, "to his special kindness and protection I commit my beloved daughter and son, and invoke for them his most kind attention and protection." Taylor v. McRa (1850) 24 S. C. Eq. (3 Rich.) 96. jj. "Knowing.” A trust is created by a will by which testatrix gave her residuary estate "as a sacred trust to my daughter Mary C. Wooldridge, knowing that she will faithfully carry out my wishes regarding it," such wishes being stated in a separate paper accompanying and treated as part of the will. Hughes v. Bent (1904) 118 Ky. 609, 81 S. W. 931. No trust is created in favor of the son and granddaughter of the testator, who were entirely dependent on him, by a will in which testator gave his wife all his property absolutely, "knowing she will deal properly with my grandchild, Gertrude Snyder, and my son, Uriah Toler." Snyder v. Toler (1914) 179 Mo. App. 376, 166 S. W. 1059. No trust is created by a will in which testator gave the widow of his deceased son the sum of $25,000 and to her son $1, stating: "I think it best to give his mother, Carrie C. McVeigh, a sufficient sum to enable her to supply his needs according to her discretion, knowing that she will do what is just and proper in the matter, and, therefore, limit my gift to him to a nominal sum," such grandson being of full age and not dependent upon the testator. Re McVeigh (1914) 181 Mo. App. 566, 164 S. W. 673. No trust is created by a will in which testator gave all his property to his son Charles, "his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, to and for his and their only use and benefit," by the added clause, "well knowing he will discharge the trust I have reposed in him by remembering my sons and daughters," the plainly expressed intention to give the property to the son for his own use and benefit indicating that the words following amounted only to a recommendation of his other children to the kindness of the son. Bardswell v. Bardswell (1838) 9 Sim. 319, 59 Eng. Reprint, 381. A trust is created by a will by which testatrix gave a certain person a legacy of £3,000, "and a like sum of £3,000 in addition for the trouble she will have in acting as my executrix," and gave her residuary estate to such person, "her executors, administrators, and assigns, well knowing that she will make a good use and dispose of it in a manner in accordance with my views and wishes," the separate legacy, as well as the words used by the testatrix, showing that such person was not to take the residue beneficially. Briggs v. Penny (1851) 3 49 A.L.R.-5. Macn. & G. 546, 42 Eng. Reprint, 371. An absolute gift unencumbered with a trust is created by a will in which a testator, whose family consisted of his wife, with whom he appeared to have lived on terms of the closest affection and trust, two younger children, and an eldest son who had shortly before the date of the will made a marriage with which the testator was much displeased, and which he had unsuccessfully attempted to have dissolved, -gave his wife an annuity, and, after other provisions, devised to her the residue of his estate, "well knowing she will religiously carry out what she knows to be my wishes in the disposal of it," it being evident that the testator, at the time of making the will, preferred not to stereotype his then wishes, but instead to extend the dominion over the ultimate disposal of his property beyond his own life, in the person of his wife. Clancarty v. Clancarty (1893) Ir. L. R. 31 Eq. 530 -C. A. kk. "Like." No trust is created by the following provision in a will by which a testatrix, after giving all her property to her sister, provided: "Should the $5,000 bond remain intact at her death, and should the following beneficiaries remain kind to her, I would like her to dispose of things as follows; after paying off all funeral and doctor bills and church bills [naming certain persons] a little money as remembrance for their kindness to me. . . . Remainder to be divided evenly amongst my remaining nephews and nieces." Re Sweeney (1923) 120 Misc. 668, 120 N. Y. Supp. 332. ul. "May." An absolute interest is given by a will by which testator gave to his wife "the new house with the property thereto belonging . and she may will it, I mean the old homestead, to any of my children at her own discretion." Ahl v. Bosler (1896) 175 Pa. 526, 34 Atl. 805. The word "may" in a testamentary provision whereby testator gave certain land to his daughter, with the provision, "She will not have power to sell, but may leave the same to her children," is precatory only, and so cannot defeat the otherwise operative effect of the devise. McIntyre v. McIntyre (1888) 123 Pa. 329, 10 Am. St. Rep. 529, 16 Atl. 783. mm. "Not doubting." No trust is created by a will in which testator gave the residue of his property to his wife "for her use and comfort and to be disposed of as she pleases at or before her decease, when no doubt she will make such disposition of the same as she may then think most proper." Kinter v. Jenks (1862) 43 Pa. 445. In Wynne v. Hawkins (1782) 1 Bro. Ch. 179, 28 Eng. Reprint, 1068, it was said of a devise to testator's wife, "not doubting she will give what shall be left to my grandchildren," that, if the intention was clear what was to be given and to whom, the words "not doubting" would be strong enough to create a trust. A trust is created by a will in which testator devised certain estate to a nephew, "not entertaining the least doubt but that he will, in due time and upon the first proper occasion, take care not only to have the said estate so devised to him by me, but my paternal estates, settled in such manner that the said estates may continue in the male line of our family and in our name and blood," the objects being sufficiently defined and certain. Malone v. O'Connor (1835) Lloyd & Goold (t. Plunket) (Ir.) 465. nn. "Recommend" or "recommending." Though "recommendation" may in some cases amount to a direction and create a trust, yet, being a flexible term, if such a construction of it be inconsistent with any positive provision in the will, it is to be considered as a recommendation, and nothing more. Knott v. Cottee (1847) 2 Phill. Ch. 192, 41 Eng. Reprint, 915. No trust is created by a will in which testator gave his wife his whole estate, real and personal, "recommending her at the same time to make some small allowance at her convenience to each of my brothers and sisters; say to each $1,000." Ellis v. Ellis (1849) 15 Ala. 296, 50 Am. Dec. 132. No trust in favor of Harvard College is created by a will by which testator gave his nephew and his nephew's son all his interest in certain lands, adding: "And I recommend to my said nephew to leave his portion thereof after his own death and the death of his wife in trust for the said [son] and to his children or descendants if any be alive at the time of the death of his said son, and, if there be none so alive, to Harvard College;" the will showing that, when the testator intended a trust to exist, he said so in plain language. Re Whitcomb (1890) 86 Cal. 265, 24 Pac. 1028. No trust is created in favor of testator's children by the following provision: "I give, devise, and bequeath all my estate, real and personal, to my wife, Abby H. Gilbert, to her and her heirs forever; recommending to her to give the same to my children at such time and in such manner as she shall think best," there being no certainty as to parties entitled or the shares in which they were to take, and the gift to the wife being absolute. Gilbert v. Chapin (1848) 19 Conn. 342. No trust is imposed upon testator's widow, to whom he gave the whole of his estate "to have and to hold in fee simple and with power to sell, devise, and bequeath the same," by the following clause: "I, however, recommend to my said wife the following named persons, believing them to be the proper individuals to inherit under existing circumstances the principal part of my estate, and supposing that the same causes which have induced me to prefer them to other relatives and friends will operate on her mind when she makes her will. . . . If my wife shall die without making a will, then it is my will that the above-named sixteen persons shall inherit my remaining estate after the death of my wife in the following manner." Goslee v. Goslee (1906) 29 Ky. L. Rep. 654, 94 S. W. 638. No trust is created by advisory paragraphs after a devise to a university, beginning: "It is contemplated," "I recommend," "In furtherance of the purpose of the bequest." Hutchinson's Succession (1904) 112 La. 656, 36 So. 639. No imperative obligation is imposed by a will in which testator gave his wife the balance of an estate "to dispose of it as she will elect," adding: "I would, however, recommend to her to increase the fund of the First Presbyterian Church of Mendham, New Jersey, to double the amount set apart in this instrument, and at her pleasure if she, my wife, feel disposed to do so, but it is not obligatory; also to increase the donation to" another person in event such other should remain with testator's mother to the end of her life, and fixing the extent of such increase. Eberhardt v. Perolin (1892) 49 N. J. Eq. 570, 25 Atl. 510, reversing (1891) 48 N. J. Eq. 592, 23 Atl. 501. The absolute estate given to the sisters of testatrix by a will in which, in a certain event, she directed that her property should go to her sisters and brothers, share and share alike, is not affected by a provision that, "in case of the death of either of my sisters, the property herein bequeathed to them is to go to the survivor or survivors, and at the death of all the persons herein named as taking on the death of my child, it is recommended the amount of property coming to them shall go to the lineal descendants of John Moffat." Field v. New York (1886) 38 Hun (N. Y.) 590, affirmed in (1887) 105 N. Y. 623. Only recommendatory force is to be given to the provisions of a will by which testator devised certain property to his son Ellis, and further provided that, in case his son Ellis should happen to die without issue, then and in such case he recommended it to him to give and devise such property to his brother Robert. Cunliffe v. Cunliffe (1770) 2 Ambl. 686, 27 Eng. Reprint, 446. No mandatory force is to be given to the recommendation of a will by which testatrix left the income of certain property to a sister for life, and directed that such sister, "if she pleased, by will or assignment in her lifetime," might give her estate to the children born of her body, and, if she died without issue, it should be in her power to leave the same to whom she thought most deserving of it, recommending her to have a due regard to the aiding and assisting the relations and kindred of testatrix's mother. Randal v. Hearle (1793) 1 Anstr. 124, 145 Eng. Reprint, 820. No trust is created by a will in which testatrix gave her fortune to one, and, if he should die without issue, recommended it to him to do justice to A and her children if he should think them worthy of it, but, if any unforeseen accident should make the whole or any part acceptable or serviceable to him, he might dispose of it if he should think fit. Le Maitre v. Bannister (1770) Prec. in Ch. 200, note, 24 Eng. Reprint, 97, note. Only discretionary force is to be given to a testamentary provision: "I recommend to my sister to settle and convey, or join with her husband in settling and conveying, all my estates and property which she may derive from me, after my own decease, to the use of her two daughters." Meggison v. Moore (1795) 2 Ves. Jr. 630, 30 Eng. Reprint, 813. A trust is created by a will by which testator gave his wife all of his personal estate, “relying on her that, if she should thereafter intermarry, she would secure to herself whatever she should possess herself of by virtue of his will," and "recommending" to her that she should by her will dispose of what she should die possessed of under his will among certain persons named. Horwood v. West (1823) 1 Sim. & Stu. 387, 57 Eng. Reprint, 155. Only precatory effect is to be given. to words by which testator, after giving his daughter an absolute power of appointment by will over certain property, recommended, though he did not absolutely enjoin, his daughter to distribute the same in equal shares at her decease amongst her daughters. Young v. Martin (1843) 2 Younge & C. Ch. Cas. 582, 63 Eng. Reprint, 260, A trust is created by a will in which testator devised all his real estate to his son, adding: "And I do hereby recommend to my said son to |