396 JONES v. STOCRETT.—2 BLAND.

But, as the annual and punctual payment of the interest payable
to Ann, must, depend in a great degree upon the form of the in-
vestment, I was unwilling to make the selection until the plaintiffs
had been heard. The meaning of the phrase " good security,"
used by the testator, must be taken in connexion with that indefi-
nite, and perhaps great length of time, during- which it is very
evident he * intended it should continue to be "good secu-
413 rity;" and thus, understanding' the testator to mean per-
manently and durably good security, I feel that my discretion must
be limited to a selection among securities of that description; that
is, government stock, or a mortgage on unincumbered real estate,
or good bank stock. But apart from this manifestation of the tes-
tator's intention, it must be recollected, that generally, in cases of
this kind, if the trustees were of themselves to put this legacy out
on mere personal security, it would be deemed a breach of trust,
and they would be held accountable accordingly. Brown v. Litton,
1 P. Will. 140; Trufford v. Boehm, 3 Atk. 445; A dye v. Feuilleteau,
1 Cox, 24; DC Mandeville v. Crompton 1 Ves. & Bea. 359; Wilkes v.
Steward, Cooper's Rep. 6; Walker v. Symonds, 3 Swan. 63; Collis
v. Collis, 2 Cond. Cha. Rep. 459. The prayer of the plaintiffs
cannot be granted; and; therefore, it is ordered, that the said peti-
tion be, and the same is hereby dismissed with costs.

On the 16th of December, 1825, the defendant Wayman put in
his answer, in which he admits the will of his testator; and states,
that a provision having been made therein for the testator's
nephew Larkin Shipley, as well as for the plaintiff, it was agreed,
that the defendant should take charge of the bequest to the lega-
tee Larkin; and that the other defendant should manage the legacy
given to the plaintiff Ann; that a large proportion of the testator's
estate consisted of bonds and notes, some of which, and particu-
larly those deemed doubtful, had been collected, or pressed for
payment, leaving such as were good to stand on interest; consider-
ing them as good investments as could be made within the mean-
ing of the testator's will; that he had made some payments to the
plaintiff Ann; and that he had wished to have had the whole of her
legacy paid over to her husband as proposed by him; but that the
Court had determined otherwise.

After which Jones and wife, by their petition, prayed that the
investment might be made in stock of the Bank of Westminster.

BLAND, C., 20th January, 1826.—Ordered, that the trustees
Stockett and Wayman, unless cause to the contrary be shewn by
them, on or before the fourth day of the next March Term, be and
they are hereby directed and required to invest the money hereto-
fore brought into this Court, in stock of the Bank of Westminster;