Asociación de Señoras v. Diana y Martinez. of this my will, and if for any reason said charitable establishment shall not exist or shall have then disappeared, in such case the inheritance shall go, under the same conditions and powers, to the Instituto de Segunda Enseñza of Ponce; and when this latter shall unfortunately not be in existence, then the inheritance shall fall to the work or establishment most deserving and in most need in the said town of Ponce, because I was born in said district and all my best wishes are in favor of it, and therefore under no circumstances shall it be employed outside of the district under any pretext or for any reason." About a year and a half after the making of this will, and on the 15th of May, 1875, the testator, Silva, died, and the friend, Juan Apolinario Laboy, took possession of the estate and complied with the terms thereof as to the special bequests, administered the estate during his lifetime strictly in accordance with the will, delivering to the complainant half of the income of the estate, to its satisfaction. About this same time, and in further compliance with the will, this friend Laboy made his own will, or some similar instrument, and in it named as his successor to manage this estate, his wife, Dominga Fernandez Verdez, and set out in the instrument that in case of her death, he named in her stead his foster son, José Laboy. That the said first manager, trustee, or whatever he was, Juan Apolinario Laboy, died in about the year 188- and his said wife at once entered upon the possession and administration of the estate under the terms of his said appointment, and in like manner fully complied with the terms of the Silva will, and gave half the product of the estate to the complainant, to its entire satisfaction, and continued so to do up to the 15th day of January, 1891, when she died. But this trustee or manager, whichever she was, in her lifetime failed to comply with the provision Asociación de Señoras v. Diana y Martinez. of Silva's will which required her, upon taking possession of the estate, to make her own will or by some other such act to name her successor, and for this reason the complainant insists that the third or alternative provision of the Silva will, entitling complainant to the immediate possession of the entire estate, became operative, and that the foster son, José Laboy, by operation of law, faded out of the equation as soon as his foster mother took possession of the estate; but, notwithstanding these facts, the said José Laboy, immediately upon the death of his said foster mother, went into possession of the estate and managed it up to the time of his death, which occurred on the 13th day of November, 1903, and, after taking possession of it, executed, on the 4th of October, 1893, a public document called a "substitution of heirship," wherein he recited that, having taken possession of said estate, under the provisions of the Silva will, after the death of his foster mother, he must comply with the provision of the will of Silva in the appointment of his own successor, and for that purpose named his wife, the present respondent Josefa Diana y Martinez, and attempted to confer upon her the powers which he claimed had been conferred upon himself by his foster father, Juan Apolinario Laboy, having made him alternative under the Silva will; and thereafter, just before the time of his death, in 1903, he, the said José Laboy, made his own will and in it, after reciting the facts, attempted to ratify his act in substituting his wife as the trustee or manager under the Silva will. That, upon the death of her said husband, José Laboy, as aforesaid, his said wife, this respondent Josefa Diana y Martinez, claiming to act under the public document and will so executed by her husband, took possession of the said estate and has so continued up to the present time. Asociación de Señoras v. Diana y Martinez. It appears also that the said José Laboy in his lifetime made long leases of different portions of the land in question, of some of which leases the complainant had notice and received its share of the rents therefrom; but, shortly before his death, the said Laboy renewed several of them without notice to the complainant, for long terms, and in several instances received his half of the rent in advance, and in some instances even discounted his share to get the cash in hand. These leases are alleged to have been made for ridiculously low rentals. After his wife, the respondent Josefa Diana y Martinez took possession, she also, without notice to the complainant, extended some of these leases for long terms, beginning in the future, also, as it is claimed, at ridiculously low rentals. Finally, without notice to the complainant, she attempted to, and did, get, under the local statutes of the island, a possessory title to all the same, still without notice to the complainant, when it received knowledge of her acts through the legal notice which the local court caused to be published, and then came in and opposed her application and defeated it. This respondent Josefa, about the time she began to make efforts to get this complete title in herself, some time in the year 1904, ceased to make any payments of the usufruct or profits of the estate to the complainant, and the latter, on ascertaining her intention in the premises, brought this suit. The answer to the complaint admits the facts above stated as to the making of the original will and the substitution of the said Dominga Fernandez Verdez as his successor by the said Juan Apolinario Laboy, and the naming of his foster son, the said José Laboy, as alternative substitute as aforesaid, and that the said Dominga Fernandez Verdez did not execute any instrument designating any successor of herself to manage said estate, Asociación de Señoras v. Diana y Martinez. but alleges that her foster son, José Laboy, became entitled to manage said estate by reason of the fact that, under her will, made in 1869,—some four years before the making of the original (Silva) will,-he, the said José Laboy, was her universal heir, and therefore became entitled to all her property, including whatever rights she had in the Silva estate, the latter, of course, being subject to a servitude or lien running with the land, to secure the payment of half the net usufruct to the complainant. The answer denies that the failure of Dominga Fernandez Verdez to appoint a successor in the management of the estate, as provided in the Silva will, in any manner violated its provisions, because (as alleged) the law existing at that time forbade perpetuities of any kind, and that therefore the first beneficiary, Juan Apolinario Laboy, in fact received the title in fee, subject only to the servitude to run with the land. In other words, the answer sets out and contends that, under the Silva will, the property went absolutely to the said Juan Apolinario Laboy, with power in the latter to sell or transfer the same inter vivos whenever he chose, or to will it away or dispose of it in any other manner, but at all times subject to the servitude in favor of the complainant for the net half of the usufruct thereof. The answer further contends that the complainant ratified the act of the said José Laboy in so taking possession of the Silva estate and renting portions of the same to divers persons, by accepting its share of the rent with full knowledge of the facts, and pleads estoppel against it in that behalf. And in like manner alleges the knowledge of the complainant of the taking possession of the said estate by the respondent Josefa Diana y Martinez after the death of José Laboy, her husband, and the acceptance by the complainant of rents at such time in Asociación de Señoras v. Diana y Martinez. the premises, and because of this, also, pleads estoppel against the complainant. It further denies that the respondent Josefa Diana y Martinez has ever refused to recognize the rights of complainant, but claims that she is the legal owner of the said estate and entitled to the possession of the same, and admits that she obtained a possessory title thereto by due process of law, but denies that she acted fraudulently in so doing, as alleged, and asserts her good faith in the premises, because, as alleged, she always recognized the rights of the complainant. It further admits the making of every lease set up in the complaint, but insists that the same are reasonable, considering the condition and the amount of improvement necessary to be made; that the lessees had no knowledge of any incapacity in the said José Laboy or his wife, the respondent Josefa, to make or extend the same; and that the complainant stood by and saw the same made, and accepted rents thereunder, and permitted, without objection, the lessees to go to great expense in and about such improvements, and that therefore complainant is estopped, etc. Respondents further allege that on the 27th of January, 1905, complainant stipulated with one of the respondents, Julio N. Chardon, that in case complainant won this suit, the said respondent should be entitled to continue in possession of the portion of the land he has under lease, at an increased rental. It further admits certain allegations of the bill about money belonging to the estate, that was loaned out on mortgage and the property afterwards transferred to the party in possession of the estate, and admits that such property belongs to the estate, and that complainant is entitled to half the product thereof. It closes by claiming that the only remedy complainant |