The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-07-17

clear on this point. She made at least one
conveyance suppoSng she was a surviving
trustee.
:. The winton Coal Company, Limited, should
render an account TO the plaintiff Of tho proceeds
of the Isaac Dean interest, and of the Church
interest to the extent indicated in the previous
finding.
The finding seems to me 10 be sound in law,
and is certainly necessary 10 secure Justice to
the parties in this case. The Winton Coal Com.
pany, Limited, was organized in December, 1883,
with capital stock Of $4,000. Catherine Win.
ton held $1,000; W. W. winton, A. II. winton,
b. NJ. Wnton and Thomas Lvey, 900 each
The bulk Of the Griffin tract, consisting of coal
and unsold surface was conveyed by W. W. Win.
ton and wife in December, 1855, to the Winton
Coal Company Under the original declarations
Of trust ". W. Winton and wife had the right
to make this conveyance. The company pro.
ceeded 10 mine coal and TO sell lots. This
conveyance made no change in the trust i'm.
pressed upon the property conveyed. The knowl-
edge of W. W. Wnton and of Catherine Winton,
in law, must he imputed to the Winton Coal
Company. There is danger of double ac.
counting. This can be guarded against when
the account is stated.
THE ACCoUNTINGS.
= The accounings to be made as detailed in
these conclusions of law should be stated in this
case now pending, on the equity side Of the
court.
Defendants counsel maintain that outside Of
W. W. Winton and his estate, there can be no
decree made in this case directing anybody else
to account, for the reason that equity has no
jurisdiction. Tho law relied upon to sustain
this contention is clearly stated in Zacharias We.
Zacharas, % Pa. 4j2, as follows:
"Some trusts are exclusively CoCnzabe in
courts of equity, and over Others, courts of law
and equity have concurrent jurisdiction. and the
| rule is we'll settled in regard TO the latter that
the statute (of limiations) is equally bar in
both jurisdictions, because otherwise creditor
might always clude the statute by elccting to
pursue his remedy in equity. The sound rule
established on the solid foundation Of authority
and policy is, that the trusts are not to be
reached or affected by the statute OF limitatio
are those technical, continuing trusts which are
not at all coGnizsblc in law, but fall within
the lroper, peculiar and exclusive jurisdiction OF
ChanCery."
There are other subsequent authorities in
Pennsylvania TO the same effect. Inspired by
this doctrine, counsel for the defense say: II
Isaac Dean, or his successor, the plaintiff in this
| case, claims from the csta,e Of Catherine VIM
| ton any money received by Catherine Wnton on
account OF the Isaac Dean interest, or on account
of the Joseph Church interest during her life.
| time, let such claim he presented in the Or.
phans Court, or be settled by an action at law,
| to the largest portion of the claim. And so
| with the Wnton Coal Company Let the plain.
| tiff bring his action at law and prove his case
| in the usual way. While concedng the authority
| Of the cases cited I am nevertheless unwilling
| to send the plaintiff into the Orphans Court
| ot TO compel him TO resort to an action at
| law. The matters in dispute between the parties
should be settled in the present And why
| not? The Dean and Church interests having
| intn hn Of (ath into
| and of the Winton Coal Company impressed
| with a trust, as has alreary been found. and
| they having proceeded TO manage the trust
| property in an active manner by mining coal
| paying and collecting royalties selling lots and
| collecting purchase money, they are just as
| much bound, in my judgment, to render theiI
| accounts in a court Of equity would W. W.
] Winton himself il living. take it that il /;
the character Of the trust and not the manner
| in which a person becomes a trustee that deter
| mines the question Of continuing trust anC
| the exclusive jurisdiction OF a court of chan
| Gerry. And in the recent case Of Church v,
| Winton, supra, the supreme court says in sub
| stance in discussing Catherine Winton's trustee
| ship, that IL not co.trustee with her husband
| vet II she took trust property with knowledg,
| Of the trust, she would be bound TO account
Of course the precise question under dis
| cussion was not before the supreme court a
that time.
TNTERLoCUToRY DECREE.
Let counsel prepare an interlocutory decree il
accordance with the foregoing conclusions Of law
and submit the same for approval within tel
days from this date, when further order vii
be made as to exceptions
The attorneys in the case are S. F
Price and II. NJ. Hannah for the plain
tiffs and |. II. Burns for the defend
ants.