38 rmnnmn nsronrmn.
statement of the trusts was not signed and delivered to the bishop
until the bishop was in Chicago, some time in the month of'April,
and possibly the letter upon theback of the declaration of the trusts
was written thereon at or before the time it was delivered to the
bishop. This, however, seems to me to be of little consequence, as '
there can be no doubt of the proposition that if a conveyance is made
A . to a trustee upon trusts thereafter to be declared or designated by
the grantor, and the trustee accepts the designation of uses so made `
bythe grantor, the trustee is bound by such declaration and designation
as completely as if the deed and declaration of trust were simul-
taneous, and part of one and the same transaction. There can be no
doubt of the fact that by the conveyance of the property in question
to the bishop he became a trustee, and until the objects of the trust 4
were designated he was a more naked trustee; but as soon as the
grantor had in writing indicated the uses to which the property was
t r to be applied, and the trustee had accepted the terms of the trust so
indicated, the transaction was complete; so that even if we assume
or admit that the letter on the back of the declaration of trust was
written there before the delivery of the instrument and the accept-
ance of the trusts, then the written declaration of trust, dated Febru-
ary 4th, must undoubtedly be considered as modified by the letter of
V April 18th; but the modincations so made are of no importance at this
time, as they only related to the management of the estate during
the life and minority of the child, and during the life of the wife
after her husband’s death and while she remained a widow. If this
child or the widow of Keegan were yet alive, important questions
might arise as to the supportof the child during her minority, and
the support of the widow; but the particulars in which the letter
modifies the declaration of trust in no way affect the questions as to ·
the disposition to be made of the estate in case of the death of the
child without issue.
The child, Mary Gertrude Keegan, was born November 15, 1875,
and on the seventh day of February, 187 6, when the child was but
little more than four months old, a deed in fee-simple was made by `
Keegan and his wife, conveying to this child two lots then owned by
Keegan, described as No. 425 May street and 457 West Twelfth
F street, in this city, and being part of the property conveyed to Bishop
Ireland by the deed of February 4, 1879. At the time this deed was
executed and acknowledged Keegan remarked to the notary, pointing
to the child, who was held in her mother’s arms, ‘* She is early in ac-
quiring property," and helianded the deed towards the child, but did