Validity of a Will.—The case of Peard v. Keke-
wich, came before the Master of the Rolls a few days since, 
for the opinion of the Court on the effect of two wills, one 
creating and the other exercising a power of appointment.
Shuldham Peard, late of Barton-place, Exeter, a rear ad-
miral in the navy, by his will of the 15th June, 1829, left
his interest in certain tithes, &c., to such of the children of
George Shuldham Peard, and in such manner as he should 
appoint.   At the date of the will, George Shuldham Peard 
had no children, but afterwards, on the 29 of June, 1829,
and more than two years before the death of the testator, 
which happened on the 27th December, 1832, the plaintiff, 
a child of George Shuldham Peard, was born.   George S.
Peard made his will, dated 30th November, 1836, and 
thereby directed the fund to be accumulated till the plaintiff 
should attain the age of 23, at which time he was to be 
entitled to it; but if he should die under 21, it was to go 
over.  The question was, whether this was void for remote-
ness, and whether the trust for accumulation was good.
The Master of the Rolls was of opinion that the appoint-
ment was not void for remoteness, and that the trust for ac-
cumulation was good.