Evening journal., 1912-04-04
COURT UP HOLDS
DEED OF TRUST

An interesting article appears in the
March issue OF the Trust Companies,
I. monthly magazine devoted TO trust
companies and banking, under the
heading "lrrevocable Trust-Trust
Officer as Lawyer" The item deals
with a case recently contested before
the courts, in which a deed of trust
was the figure of contention. This deed
OF trust had been drawn by John s
Rossell, vice-president, secretary and
trust officer of the Security Trust and
Safe Deposit Company. The article is
as follows:
1t has been said that the trust COM
pany is usurping the office of the law
yer There are many sound arguments
which disprove this statement, but
however that may be, it not infre-
ouenuy happens that a trust officer
performs certain duties which are
} similar to those of lawyer.
II is likewise true that these duties
arc usually we'll performed. for the
reason that a careful trust officer has
had the experience necessary to guide
him in advising those who are about
10 make Wills or to execute trusts.
These functions Of a trust officer
arc we'll illustrated in the recent case
of Security Trust and Safe Deposit
Company VS.. Farraday (S2 Att. Rep.
24)
Elizabeth Campbell, who was about
20 wears old and in of an incurable
disease. but who was in full possess
sion of her mental faculties, desired
TO place certain of her property in
trust She called in the trust officer
explained that she had some funds
which she wished to leave for the
benefit of her daughter and grand
sons She had $500 on deposit in the
National Bank of Delaware. and Of
this sum she wished TO place in trust
S25OO. IL did not appear whether she
had other property or whether she in
structed the trust officer to draft a
will as we'll as the deed of trust. A
few DAYS later the trust officer drew
up the declaration Of trust and also a
will disposing of the balance of the
property. These instruments were
taken by the trust officer and two
clerks of the trust company to the
home of Mrs Campbell and read over
to her and explained before she signed
them BY the trust instrument S2500
of the daughter and grandsons with
certain declarations in case of fail
ure. The will was also executed, dis
posing of the remainder of the estate,
and at the same time, in some man
ner not explained, the sum of $500
was transferred TO the trust COM
pany.
Eight months later, at the request
Ill
again called at her home and found
her critically ill., She was desirous
of changing the disposition of all her
property, both that given in trust and
that disposed of by will The trust
officer prepared and she executed a
Taper revoking the trust and direct
ing that the money be paid to her
or in case of her death to her daugh-
ter, or to her Mrs Campbel's) eX-
ecutors. The first will was destroyed
and will leaving all her property tC
her daughter was executed. She dieC
seven days later leaving S1100 on de-
posit In the Trust Company
The question presented TO the
court was as to the validity of the
irrevocable declaration of trust The
trust had been properly declared, th'
trustee had accepted and the none,
had been delivered. Moreover, it wat
shown that the instrument had beef
clearly explained to the creator o
the trust; the trust was not unrea
soanble or improvident and the set
tier of the trust died within yer.
\ few days after the attempted revoca
tion Since the absence of the powe
of revocation does not invalidate tn
trust, and since there was no evi
dence of mistake or fraud. the cour
decided that the trust still remaine
in spite of the attempted revoca
ton.
In commenting upon the services O
the trust officer, the court said: "A
shown by the testimony, a full ex
planation of the contents OF the drai
Df the proposed settlement was mad
10 her by the draughtsman, John s
Rossell. a distinguished person. who's
skill and experience in such matters
though he was not a lawyer gave he
all the help she could probably hav
had from a member Of the bar and
>herefore. the absence Of a legal ad