8 Vict. c. 18, s. 69. will only be authorised under special circumstances: S.C. The persons interested in the inheritance must be before the Court: In re Leigh's Estate, L. R. 6 Ch. 887; In re Rudyerd's Estate, 6 Jur. (N.S.) 816. But the Court will not go so far as to recoup past outlay in the erection of permanent buildings, although these may have added to the value of the property: Williams v. Aylesbury and Buckingham Ry. Co., L. R. 9 Ch. 684; In re Rector of Hartington, 23 W. R. 484; In re Stock's Devised Estates, 42 L. T. (N.S.) 46; nor to erect buildings which cannot be settled to the same uses, e.g. proceeds of sale of glebe lands cannot be applied in restoring the chancel of the church: In re Louth & E. Coast Ry. Co., ex p. Rector of Grimoldby, 2 Ch. D. 225. The following are instances of such investments having been authorised : Proceeds of sale of glebe-lands were applied in making improvements and additions to the parsonage : ex p. Rector of Claypole, L. R. 16 Eq. 574; in repairing rectory buildings: In re Louth & E. Coast Ry. Co., ex p. Rector of Grimoldby, supra; in recouping the rector for past outlay in building a farmhouse on the glebe, the patron and diocesan consenting to the investment: ex p. Rector of Gamston, 1 Ch. D. 477; in building a vicarage house, there being no vicarage: In re Incumbent of Whitfield, J. & H. 610; ex p. Rector of Hartington, 23 W. R, 484; in recouping the rector for cost of a shed and pigstyes on the glebe, the patron and diocesan consenting to the investment: ex p. Rector of Holywell cum Needingworth, 27 W. R. 707; in the erection of farmhouses on the glebe-land: ex p. Rector of Shipton-under-Wychwood, 19 W. R. 549; in drainage works on the remaining glebe: In re Vicar of Queen Camel, 11 W. R. 503; in building a rectory, the money to be paid with the consent of the bishop to the rector on his undertaking to apply it: ex p. Rector of Bradfield St. Claire, 32 L. T. (N.S.) 248; in fencing, ditching, subdividing, and inclosing allotments allotted to the rector under the Inclosure Acts, he having power to sell part of the allotments for the purpose of raising such expenses: ex p. Lockwood, 14 Beav. 158; payment to the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty, to be applied by them in the erection of cottages for labourers: ex p. Rector of Snailwell, V.C.M., 21 June, 1878, B. 1794, cited in Seton, 4th ed. p. 1431. Proceeds of sale of lands belonging to a college were applied in the purchase of lands adjoining the vicarage of a college living, which lands were used as a brickfield, to the annoyance of the persons residing in the vicarage: ex p. Masters etc. of Trinity Coll., Cambridge, 18 L. T. (N.S.) 849. In ex p. Barrett, 15 Jur. 3, a fund in Court was reinvested in land, and a small balance of the fund was paid out to the tenant for life on his undertaking to apply it in permanent improvements. See also In re Bateman, 21 L. J. Ch. 693. Compensation monies paid in respect of injury to access, and of indemnity against the expenses of making a new road, were directed to be laid out in constructing a new road: In re D. of Marlborough's Estates, 13 Jur. 733. Monies representing charity lands were applied in improving and altering almshouses: In re Buckingham Ry. Co., 14 Jur. 1065. Proceeds of sale of settled lands have also been applied in Building cottages on land hitherto waste and unpro- Building new farmhouse where the old one was dilapi- Erecting cottages, etc.: ex p. Shaw, 4 Y. & C. Ex. 506; In re Wight, 6 W. R. 718 (where the payment was made Making lateral additions to a house, consisting of Improving the water supply: In re Lathropp's Charity, Putting a house into permanent repair: In re Aldred, Monies in Court which have arisen from the sale, enfranchisement, or exchange of lands belonging to an Univer L 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 69. 8 Vict. c. 18, 8. 69. sity or college may be applied, with the consent of the Copyhold Commissioners, "in or towards the restoration or rebuilding of the chancel of any church which the University or college to which such monies belong may be by law liable to restore or rebuild": Universities and College Estates Act Amendment Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 46). The consent of the Charity Commissioners is not required to a petition by a charity for the reinvestment in lands of a fund representing charity lands: In re William of Kyngeston's Charity, 30 W. R. 78. Removing or replacing buildings taken or injured, or substituting others in their stead.-Under this portion of the section moneys in Court were applied in removing granaries which had been rendered useless by the construction of the railway, and substituting dwellinghouses in their stead, and in removing a thatch roof which was exposed to risk of fire from sparks given out by passing trains, and substituting in its stead a slate roof: In re Johnson's Settlement, L. R. 8 Eq. 348. The application of money in Court in replacing a building taken by the company will not be ordered without a reference to Chambers as to its advisability: ex p. Churchwardens etc. of Bicester, 5 Ry. Cas. 205. In re St. Thomas's Hospital, 11 W. R. 1018, part of a fund in Court was applied in procuring and fitting up certain houses for the temporary accommodation of the patients of the hospital; and in ex p. Thorner's Charity, 12 L. T. 266, a fund was applied in rebuilding almshouses. which had been pulled down for the works of the railway. See also ex p. Dean and Chapter of Canterbury, 10 W. R. 505, as to replacing farm-buildings injured by the proximity of a railway. Payment to any party becoming absolutely entitled." Absolutely entitled" means "entitled to his or her own use," e.g. where an infant attains twenty-one, or a woman becomes discovert: Kelland v. Fulford, 6 Ch. D. 491. Similarly, a person whose title by adverse possession matures into an absolute title under the Statute of Limitations, between the taking of the land and the presentation of the petition for payment out, is a person "becoming absolutely entitled:" ex p. Winder, 6 Ch. D. 696; In re Jane Evans, 42 L. J. Ch. 357. The payment out need not be of the entire fund; but any person becoming absolutely entitled to any share of the fund can have an order for payment out of that share, leaving the other shares to be dealt with on a subsequent application, e.g. where persons entitled to two-eighths of a fund joined in the petition, the persons entitled to five-eighths being out of the jurisdiction, and the persons entitled to the remaining one-eighth being infants, an order was made for the immediate payment out of the first-mentioned two-eighths: In re Soury, L. R. 8 Ch. 736; also a dowress was held entitled to have the value of her dower ascertained by valuers, and paid to her out of the fund in Court: In re Hall's Estate, L. R. 9 Eq. 179; cf. In re Stead, 2 Ch. D. 713. Payment out has been ordered to trustees with a power of sale and the power of giving receipts, they being persons absolutely entitled within the meaning of the section: In re Hobson's Trust, 7 Ch. D. 710; In re Thomas' Settlement, 30 W. R. 244; and this has been done even where the receipt clause was wanting: In re Gooch's Estate, 3 Ch. D. 742; or even where the power of sale did not arise until after the death of the tenant for life: In re East, 2 W. R. 111; the tenant for life consenting to the application: In re Evans' Settlement, 14 Ch. D. 511. In such a case the Court will not inquire what the trusts are: In re Hobson's Trusts, supra. See also In re Illman's Will, 39 L. J. Ch. 760, where payment was ordered to trustees with power only of giving receipts. But where infants were interested in the fund, the Court has hesitated to order payment out to trustees for them: In re Horwood, 3 Giff. 218; In re Reaston, L. R. 13 Eq. 564; ex p. R. of Little Steeping, 5 Ry. Cas. 207; secus where one of the trustees was entitled for life to the income: In re Illman's Will, supra. The Court will not order payment out to a sole trustee unless all parties interested are present: In re Roberts, 9 W. R. 758. In cases where the Court does not see fit to order payment out to trustees for infants, the fund can be carried to the separate accounts of the infants, and the income ordered to be paid to the trustees, liberty being reserved to apply in Chambers for the payment out of any share when it becomes payable In re Reaston's Estate, L. R. 13 Eq. 564; In re Lowry, 29 L. T. (N.S.) 233. A person absolutely entitled may have part of the fund in Court reinvested in land and part paid out to him: In re Jones' 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 69. 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 69. Trust Estate, 39 L. J. Ch. 190; In re De Beauvoir, 2 De G. Transfer to another account is equivalent to payment out; see notes to sec. 80, post, p. 182. Payment out to the official trustee of charitable funds is such a payment out to a person absolutely entitled, as to relieve the promoters from the cost of reinvestment: In re Bishop Monk's Horfield Trust, 29 W. R. 462. Trustees of a charity are persons absolutely entitled: In re Lathropp's Charity, L. R. 1 Eq. 467; ex p. Trustees of Tid St. Giles' Charity, 17 W. R. 758; and where they have other funds standing in their names, money paid into Court under this Act will be paid out to them to be added to those funds: In re Spurstow's Charity, L. R. 18 Eq. 279; In re Lister's Hospital, 6 De G. M. & G. 184; cf. In re Carpenters' Company, 16th Nov., 1883. But where the trustees had no power of sale, the previous consent of the Charity Commissioners was required: In re Faversham Charities, 10 W. R. 291. A person having under a will an option to purchase at a fixed sum lands which were represented by a larger fund in Court under the Act, was held entitled to the payment out to him of the fund in Court on paying the fixed sum to the executors of the will: In re Cant's Estate, 4 De G. & J. 503. See also In re Beaufoy's Estate, 1 Sm. & G. 20, where a tenant pur autre vie after the death of the last cestuique vie, obtained payment out to him of the proceeds of sale of renewable leaseholds. There has been a considerable conflict of authority whether a fund in Court representing land in strict settlement can be paid out without the execution of a disentailing deed. This deed had been dispensed with in re S. E. Ry. Co., 30 Beav. 215; Notley v. Palmer, L. R. 1 Eq. 241; In re Watson, 10 Jur. (N.S.) 1011 (L. J. J.); In re Wood's S. E., L. R. 20 Eq. 372; In re Row, L. R. 17 Eq. 300; In re Maunsell, 2 Ir. R. Eq. 32. But Lord Selborne, L.C., declined to follow this practice in a case where the fund represented land taken by a railway company under their compulsory powers: In re Butler's Will, L. R. 16 Eq. 479; and the Court of Appeal have since held themselves bound by the latter decision: In re Reynolds, 3 Ch. D. 61 (where a deed enlarging the base fee created by a deceased tenant in tail had to be executed). See also In re Broadwood's S. E., 1 Ch. D. 438; In re Norcop, 31 L. T. (N.S.) 85; |