the properfy rireinamed, and^the proportions they are to re- coive are stated. The trusts ifire all alearlydefined. In. the two instances in "which it iff pEovided that distribution shall be uiade among the. childrenof certain persbns, there is desig- nation of a class of beneficiaries. : The grantor in such a caae could not know when; the trust ia created, who of the class whom he desired Jo share in his property might be living at his death, or the names of sueh persons, or •yhether there would be chiidren of some othef benefioiary named sarviviog him; ■and Ido not think it is theiineaning far intention Jof ihe stat- uteithat the failure to name in eVery instance the pereon whom he might desire in certain cbntingenoiea to ultimately share in his estate-^the class in which such person would belong being specifically designated— should be held to defeat the conveyance as a valid trust instrument, on the ground that it does not fully express and clearly define the trust ;■ aud, on the whole, I am of the opinion that by the instruments in ques- tion an active trust, valid' uhder the statute, was created, and that the plaintif was made the trustee of an express; trust, clothed with the legal title to the premises in controversy. �The remaining question as, have the defendants established aparamount title? The proofs show that Levi J; Merriok riever acquired a title by conveyanoe from Fellows. He held a bond for a deed, and entered into possession thelreunder.
- It is also proven that he eut timber on the premises, and, by
. Personal acts of occupancy and use, and by varions lettings of portions of the land to other persons, he maintained the possession of an ostensible owner for a long series of years. In May, 1857, he received from Worthington a deed of the entire tract, but the evidence does not show that Worthing- ton ever had any title. Merrick tindertook to sell certain parcels of the land to third parties, but the contracts were never consummated because he could not convey a clear title. It will be noticed, also, that the deed, from Worthington was made long before the instalments of purchase money were due under "the contract of purchase from Fellows. There is no prdof that Merrick ever paid any portion of that purchase ��� �
