case jevon versus bush eoden die in court a trustee in a recognizance release  it without any consideration decree to pay the principal and interest not  exceed the penalty Henry beard Lord bellamount in be about to leave England  and have be in arm for king Charles the first and under great oppression from  the then usurp power lend pound to one gardener of Croydon on a recognizance  of pound which he take in the name of the defendant bush and intend it as a  provision for the plaintiff his infant daughter then but two year old and bush  at the same time execute a declaration of the trust and covenant that the  plaintiff may receive and enjoy the full fruit and benefit of this security  without a hindrance or disturbance from he or any claim under he soon  afterward the Lord bellamount go beyond sea and die in Persia in gardener be  about to sell his estate and the purchaser have notice of the recognizance  bush be prevail Vernon chancery case upon to acknowledge satisfaction and in  and not before the plaintiff have notice of this declaration of trust and  understanding that bush have acknowledge satisfaction on this recognizance  bring her bill to be relieve against this breach of trust the defendant by  answer insist and it be so prove in the cause that he be but year old when he  make this declaration of trust and insist likewise that though the trust be  declare to be for the benefit of the infant yet it be only to Vernon chancery  case er p protect the father estate who be obnoxious to those time and that he  never have one penny direct or indirect for his acknowledge satisfaction on  that recognizance nor ever have the recognizance in his custody but the Lord  Bellamounts widow deliver up the same and as he believe receive the money due  thereon and that he at her request or by her order or by the order of the Lord  bellamount acknowledge satisfaction on the recognizance and believe he have  some warrant or order in write from they or one of they for acknowledge  satisfaction thereon but that the same be burn or lose in the fire of London  and insist that after all this length of time satisfaction be acknowledge in  above year since he ought not now to be charge with a pretend breach of trust  the counsel for the defendant insist that the plaintiff ought to prove some  fraud in the trustee or that he receive to his own use part of the money Lord  chancellor the proof lie on the defendant side he ought to discharge himself  and it be not sufficient for he to say he never receive any of this money for  his own use there be no doubt but a infant may be a trustee and the breach of  trust be commit in after he be of full age qure if breach of trust during  minority will this court decree he to make it good when of age court have hold  a infant bind by offer make during infancy in case the other party be thereby  delay and no application to the court by the infant upon attain his age Cecil  v Com Salisbury post vol so infant will be bind by a condition annex to the  land if the condition be break during the minority and if a recovery he have  against a infant in a action of waste he be bar for ever   Litt b so if  warranty descend where the entry of the infant be not lawful the warranty  shall bind the infant   Litt a so by a condition annex to a gift scot ux v  Haughton post vol and be enable to convey by stat whether cap this statute  which authorize conveyance by infant trustee under order of the court of  chancery and exchequer be repeal and more extensive provision enact by saint g  c so chancery will relieve against infant in case of statute though not  extendible against he at law Middleton v Shelly Le v infant executor can  commit a devastavit Whitmore v wield ante and therefore decree he to pay the  principal money with damage not exceed S be the penalty Vernon chancery case  of the recognizance the interest on the be to be compute from the time of  gardener enter into the recognizance Reg lib a fol and cite my Lord Hobart who  say that beneficiary and trust in a action of the case against his trustee  shall recover for a breach of trust in damage this opinion of Lord hobart be  also cite in earl of Kildare v Eustace post say qure nevertheless et vide the  case of Barnardiston v soam state trial vol where north Lord chief justice in  his argument in the exchequer Chamber say No action on the case will lie for a  breach of trust because the determination of the principal thing videlicet the  trust do not belong to the commonlaw but to the court of chancery so trustee  to preserve contingent remainder join in a conveyance this hold plain a breach  of trust and equity will relieve pie v gorge p wms Mansell v Mansell p wms