Interest cannot be recovered as damages for the detention of the principal, after the principal sum has been paid; Stewart v. Barnes, 153 U. S. 456, 14 Sup. Ct. 849, 38 L. Ed. 781. Where interest is recoverable, not as a part of the contract, but by way of damages, if the plaintiff has been guilty of lathes in unreasonably delaying the pros ecution of his claim, it may be properly withheld ; U. S. v. Sanborn, 135 U. S. 271, 10 Sup. Ct. 812, 34 L. Ed. 112. Interest allowed for non-payment of a judgment is in the na ture of statutory damages ; Morley v. R. Co., 146 U. S: 162, 13 Sup. Ct. 54, 36 L. Ed. 925.
On legacies. On specific legacies it has been held that interest is to be calculated from the date of the death of the testator ; 2 Ves. Sen. 563 ; Shobe's Ex'rs v. Carr, 3 Munf. (Va.) 10; so on a gift of a fund in trust to pay the income to a sister for life; In re Hilyard's Estate, 5 W. & S. (Pa.) 30.
A general legacy, when the time of pay ment is not named by the testator, is not payable till the end of one year after testa tor's death, at which time the interest com mences to run ; 1 Sch. & L. 10 ; Eyre v. Gold ing, 5 Binn. (Pa.) 475; Wood v. Hammond, 16 R. I. 98, 17 Atl. 324, 18 Atl. 198 ; Couch v. Eastham, 29 W. Va. 784, 3 S. E. 23 ; and this is so whether the will has been proved during the year or not ; Ogden v. Pattee, 149 Mass. 82, 21 N. E. 227, 14 Am: St. Rep. 401. Where only the interest is given, no payment will be due till the end of the second year ; 7 Ves. 89. As a general rule pecuniary lega cies do not bear interest till they are payable (one year after testator's death); Appeal of Townsend, 106 Pa. 268, 51 Am. Rep. 523.
Where a general legacy is given, and the Mille of payment is named by the testator, interest is not allowed before the arrival of the appointed period of payment, and that notwithstanding the legacies are vested; Prec. in Ch. 337. But when that period ar rives, the legatee will be entitled although the legacy be charged upon a dry reversion ; 2 Atk. 108. See, also, 1 Cox, Ch. 133. When the executor can pay a legacy without any Possible inconvenience to the estate, it has been held that interest begins to run at once ; Van Rensselaer v. Van Rensselaer, 113 N. Y. 207, 21 N. E. 75. When a legacy is given payable at a future day with interest, and the legatee dies before it becomes payable, the arrears of the interest up to the time of his death must be paid to his personal repre sentatives ; McClel. 141. And a bequest of a
sum to be paid annually for life bears in terest from the death of testator ; Eyre v. Golding, 5 Binn. (Pa.) 475 ; Flickwir's Es tate, 26 W. N. C. (Pa.) 374; and so also for a legacy of income for the support and maintenance of the legatee : Appeal of Town send, 106 Pa. 268, 51 Am. Rep. 523; especial ly is this so when the legacy is to be paid by the executors transferring to the trustees for the legatee interest-bearing securities longing to the testator's estate; id.
Where the legatee is a child of the testa tor, or one towards whom he has placed himself in loco parentis, the legacy bears interest from the testator's death, whether it be particular or residuary, vested but pay able at a future time, or contingent if the child have no maintenance. In that case the court will do what in common presump tion the father would have done—provide necessaries for the child ; 2 P. Wms. 31; 1 Dick. Ch. 310; 2 Brown, Ch. 59 ; Davison v. Rake, 44 N. J. Eq. 506, 16 Atl. 227. In case of a child en ventre sa mere at the time of the father's death, interest is allowed only from its birth; 2 Cox, Ch. 425. Where main tenance or interest is given by the will, and the rate specified, the legatee will not, in general, be entitled to claim more than the maintenance or rate specified ; 3 Atk. 697, 716; 3 Ves. 286, n. And see further, as to interest in cases of legacies to children; 15 Ves. 363; 4 Madd. 275 ; 1 P. Wins. 783 ; 3 V. & B. 183.
Interest is not allowed by way of mainte nance to any other person than the legit imate children of the testator ; 3 Ves. 10; 4 id. 1; unless the testator has put himself in loco parentis; 1 Sch. & L. 5, 6. A wife ; 15 Ves. 301; a niece ; 3 Ves. 10; a grand child ; 1 Cox, Ch. 133; are, therefore, not entitled to interest by way of maintenance. See 2 Wms. Exec. 743. Nor is a legitimate child entitled to such interest if he have a maintenance, although it may be less than the amount of the interest of the legacy ; 1 Sch. & L. 5; 3 Ves. 17. But see In re Bost wick, 4 Johns. Ch. (N. Y.) 103 ; 2 Roper, Leg. 202 ; Appeal of Townsend, 106 Pa. 268, 51 Am. Rep. 523, cited above.