A written assignment of certificates of shares of stock without delivery is not suffi cient to Constitute a valid gift, especially where the donor retained control of the shares and collected dividends thereon for four years ; Allen-West Commission Co. v. Grumbles, 129 Fed. 287, 63 C. C. A. 401.
For a full discussion of the subject, see Thornt. Gifts & Adv. ch. ix., where the cases are collected ; 15 Am. L. Reg. N. S. 701, n.; 15 Va. L. J. 737 ; 32 Cent. L. J. 11. As to what circumstances will dispense with actual physical delivery, see 9 id. 639 ; 26 Am. L. Reg. 587 ; Law Q. Rev. 446 ; see also DONA 'no MORTIS CAUSA, with respect to delivery, the requisites of which in the two classes of gifts are the same ; Thornt. Gifts § 130 ; Mur dock v. McDowell, 1 Nott & McC. (S. C.) 237, 9 Am. Dec. 684 ; Brinkerhoff v. Lawrence, 2 Sandf. Ch. (N. Y.) 400. "Gifts inter vivos and gifts cause mortis differ in nothing, except that the latter are made in expectation of death, become effectual only upon the death of the donor, and ma37 be revoked. Other wise, the same principles apply to each." Dresser v. Dresser, 46 Me. 48 ; Robson v. Jones, 3 Del. Ch. 51; Shackleford v. Brown, 89 Mo. 546, 1 S. W. 390 ; Young v. Young, 80 N. Y. 422, 36 Am. Rep. 634 ; Meriwether v. Morrison, 78 Ky. 572 ; Conser v. Snowden, 54 Md. 175, 39 Am. Rep. 368. A parol gift of land is valid when possession is taken and valuable improvements are made thereunder ; Wootters v. Hale, 83 Tex. 563, 19 S. W. 134.
The presumption is that a gift by a child to its parents is valid, and to set it aside the court must be satisfied that it was not a vol untary act of the child ; Towson v. Moore, 173 U. S. 17, 19 Sup. Ct. 332, 43 L. Ed. 597.
When the gift is perfect it is then irrev ocable, unless it is prejudicial to creditors or the donor was under a legal incapacity or was circumvented by fraud ; except in case of donatio mortis causa (q. v.), as to which
one of the distinguishing characteristics is that it is revocable during the donor's life.
If a man, intending to give a jewel to an other, say to him, Here give you my ring with the ruby in it, etc., and with his own hand delivers it to the party, this will be a good gift notwithstanding the ring bear any other jewel, being delivered by the party him self to the person to whom given ; Bacon, Max. 87. See Van Slooten v. Wheeler, 66 Hun 632, 21 N. Y. Supp. 336.
Where a father bought a ticket in a lottery, which he declared he gave to his infant daughter E., and wrote her name upon it, and after the ticket had drawn a prize he declar ed that he had given the ticket to his child B, and that the prize money was hers, this was held sufficient for a jury to infer all the formality requisite to a valid gift, and that the title in the money was complete and vested in E. See Grangiac v. Arden, 10 Johns. (N. Y.) 293. Where notes are endors ed by the owner, placed in a pocketbook, and the packet marked with the name of the don ees, a delivery to one of the donees is suffi cient, though he at once returns the packet to the donor to keep for the Present ; Bran don v. Dawson, 51 Mo. App. 237.
A certificate of deposit may be the sub ject of gift, and, when endorsed and deliv ered for such purpose, the gift is perfect and cannot be revoked by the donor before the money is collected ; Wheeler v. Glasgow, 97 Ala. 700, 11 South. 758. A written assign ment, under seal, of money in the hands of a third person, delivered to the assignee, con stitutes a valid gift and acceptance of the money ; Matson v. Abbey, 141 N. Y. 179, 36 N. E. 11.
See, generally, Thornton, Gifts ; DONATIO INTER VIVOS; DONATIO MORTIS CAUSA; Do NATIO.