TRUSTS AND TRUSTEES-Continued.

claims of creditors be treated as an irrevocable power to
convey and dispose of the land for the purposes of the trust,
or as a mortgage, requiring foreclosure proceedings before
sale, the grantor and those claiming under him have the
right to redeem, and to a reconveyance, before the execution
of the trust, upon payment of said claims. Webster v. Peet,
326.

See ASSIGNMENT FOR BENEFIT OF CREDITORS.

USE AND OCCUPATION-See ACTION.

VARIANCE-See PLEADING (1, 4).

VENDOR AND VENDEE-See SALE.

VOLUNTARY PAYMENT-See CONTRACT (1); TAXES (9).

WAIVER-See APPEAL (1, 2); CORPORATIONS (4).
WARRANTY-See FIRE INSURANCE (1); LIFE INSURANCE (2).

WASTE.

The cutting of timber not for the purpose of husbandry or clear-
ing, and in denial of the rights of the complainants in a bill
filed to restrain the commission of waste on the land, con-
stitutes waste, and is sufficient in itself, in the absence of
denial, to justify the inference that the defendant is liable to
continue to commit waste, and to authorize the issuance of
an injunction to restrain him from so doing. Webster v.
Peet, 326.

WATERS AND WATER-COURSES.

See Horton v. Sullivan, 282.

WILL.

1. The admissions of a sole devisee, that the will through
which he claims has been revoked by a later will, are
admissible as against his representatives, who seek to pro-
bate the earlier will. In re Estate of Lambie, 49.
2. Such admissions are sufficient, if believed, to establish the
fact of revocation, if the jury find that the revoking will
has been fraudulently suppressed or destroyed, in which case
a legal presumption arises that it was legally drawn and

WILL- Continued.

executed, notwithstanding How. Stat. § 5793, which requires
such an instrument to be formally executed. Id.

3. After testimony has been introduced tending to show the
revocation of a will by a later one, evidence of the decla-
rations of the testatrix, tending to show a change of mind
as to the disposition of her property, and an actual alteration
thereof, is admissible, in proceedings to contest the earlier
will, to corroborate testimony as to the existence and con-
tents of the later will. Id. 50.

4. Where the probate of a will is contested on the ground of
its revocation by a later will, in which the contestant was
named as devisee, and the existence of which is sought to
be established by parol testimony, it is competent for the
contestant to testify to the statements of the testator as to
the execution of the revoking will, but not to those of the
devisee in the first will, which is sought to be probated by
his executors. Id.

5. Evidence of the mental and physical condition of the devisee
in a will, which is claimed to have been revoked by a later
one, for a period before hi death, during which he lived
with his devisee, and had possession, as claimed, of both
wills, is admissible, in a contest over the probate of the
earlier will, to support the claim that the revoking will had
been destroyed by his devisee, by showing an opportunity
for such spoliation. Id.

6. A devise by a father to his sons of the use and occupation of
his farm for and during their natural lives, upon condition
that they allow their mother to use and occupy the dwelling-
house thereon as long as she remains his widow, and give to
her from the produce of the farm, which they are to keep
up in a good and workmanlike manner, all that she may
require for her maintenance and support, and upon the
further trust to the executors of the will to see that all of
its conditions are fully carried out and performed as therein
expressed, does not vest an estate in the sons which is sub-
ject to execution and sale to satisfy their debts, and the
executors can maintain a bill to set aside such a sale if,
made. Lee v. Enos, 276.

See ESTATES OF DECEASED PERSONS (6, 7).

WOMAN SUFFRAGE-See CONSTITUTIONAL LAW (1).

WRIT AND PROCESS-See SERVICE.