Chapter IX: Act 1837: a will made pursuant to the requirements of that statute shall

be a valid execution of a power of appointment by will, notwithstanding that some additional form or solemnity shall have been required by the instrument creating the power, and by the Wills Act 1861 a will made out of the United Kingdom by a British subject according to the forms required by the law of the place where the will was made shall, as regards personal estate, be held to be well executed and admitted to probate; consequently it has been held that an appointment made by such a will is a valid exercise of the power. As regards appointments by deed the Law of Property Amendment Act 1859 enacts that a deed attested by two witnesses shall, so far as execution and attestation go, be a valid exercise of a power to appoint by deed. The courts of equity also will interfere in some cases of defective execution in order to carry out the intentions of the settlor. The principle upon which the court acts is obscure, but the rule has been thus stated:--"Whenever a man having power over an estate, whether ownership or not, in discharge of moral or natural relations, shows an intention to execute such power, the court will operate upon the conscience of the heir (or of the persons entitled in default) to make him perfect this intention." Equity, however, only relieves against defects not of the essence of the power, such as the absence of seal or execution by will instead of deed, but where the defect is of the essence of the power, as where a consent is not obtained, equity will not assist, nor will it relieve where a power to appoint by will is purported to be exercised by deed. A power of appointment if exercised must be exercised bona fide, otherwise it will be void as fraudulent; thus it has been frequently decided that where a father, having a limited power of appointment among his children, appoints the whole fund to an infant child, who is in no need of the appointment and who is ill, in the expectation of the death of the child whereby the fund will come to him as next of kin, such appointment is void as a fraud upon the power. Where an execution is partly fraudulent and partly valid the court will, if possible, separate the two and only revoke that which is fraudulent; if, however, the two parts are not separable the whole is void. The same rule is applied in cases of excessive execution where the power is exercised in favour of persons some of whom are and some of whom are not objects of the power. The doctrine of _Election_ (q.v.) applies to appointments under powers, but there must be a gift of free and disposable property to the persons entitled in default of appointment.

The appointment must in law be read into the instrument creating the power in lieu of the power itself. Thus an appointor under a limited power cannot appoint to any person to whom the donor could not have appointed by reason of the rule against perpetuities, but this is not so in the case of a general power, for there the appointor is virtually owner of the property appointed. In applying this rule to appointments a distinction arises between powers created by deed and will, for a deed speaks from the date of its execution but a will from the death of the testator, and so limitations bad when the will was made may have become good when it comes into operation. Since the Conveyancing Act 1881 all powers may be released by the donees thereof, unless the power is coupled with a trust in respect of which there is a duty cast on the donee to exercise it; and this is so even though the donee gets a benefit by such release as one entitled in default of appointment, for this is not a fraud upon the power. (E. S. M. B.)

APPOMATTOX COURT HOUSE, a village of Appomattox county, Virginia, U.S.A., 25 m. E. of Lynchburg, in the S. part of the state. It is served by the Norfolk & Western railway. The village was the scene of the surrender of the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia under General Robert E. Lee to the Federal forces under Lieutenant-General U.S. Grant on Sunday the 9th of April 1865. The terms were: "the officers to give their individual paroles not to take up arms against the government of the United States until properly exchanged, and each company or regimental commander to sign a like parole for the men of their commands," ... neither "side arms of the officers nor their private horses or baggage" to be surrendered; and, as many privates in the Confederate Army owned horses and mules, all horses and mules claimed by men in the Confederate Army to be left in their possession.

APPONYI, ALBERT, COUNT (1846- ), Hungarian statesman, the most distinguished member of an ancient noble family, dating back to the 13th century, and son of the chancellor Gyorgy Apponyi (1808-1899) and the accomplished and saintly Countess Julia Sztaray, was born at Pesth on the 29th of May 1846. Educated at the Jesuit seminary at Kalksburg and at the universities of Vienna and Pesth, a long foreign tour completed his curriculum, and at Paris he made the acquaintance of Montalembert, a kindred spirit, whose influence on the young Apponyi was permanent. He entered parliament in 1872 as a liberal Catholic, attaching himself at first to the Deak party; but the feudal and ultramontane traditions of his family circle profoundly modified, though they could never destroy, his popular ideals. On the break up of the Deak party he attached himself to the conservative group which followed Baron Pal Senynyey (1824-1888) and eventually became its leader. Until 1905 Count Albert was constantly in opposition, but in May of that year he consented to take office in the second Wekerle ministry. A lofty and magnetic orator, his speeches were published at Budapest in 1896; and he is the author of an interesting dissertation, _Esthetics and Politics, the Artist and the Statesman_ (Hung.) (Budapest, 1895).

APPORTIONMENT (Fr. _apportionement;_ Med. Lat. _apportionamentum;_ derived from Lat. portio, share), distribution or allotment in proper shares; a term used in law in a variety of senses, (1) Sometimes it is employed roughly and with no technical meaning to indicate the distribution of a benefit (e.g. salvage or damages under the Fatal Accidents Act 1846, S 2), or liability (e.g. general average contributions, or tithe rent-charge), or the incidence of a duty (e.g. obligations as to the maintenance of highways). (2) In its strict legal interpretation apportionment falls into two classes, "apportionment in respect of estate" and "apportionment in respect of time."

1. _Apportionment in respect of Estate_ may result either from the act of the parties or from the operation of law. Where a lessee is evicted from, or surrenders or forfeits possession of part of the property leased to him, he becomes liable at common law to pay only a rent apportioned to the value of the interest which he still retains. So where the person entitled to the reversion of an estate assigns part of it, the right to an apportioned part of the rent incident to the whole reversion passes to his assignee. The lessee is not bound, however, by an apportionment of rent made upon the grant of part of the reversion unless it is made either with his consent or by the verdict of a jury. The assignee of the reversion of part of demised premises could not, at common law, re-enter for breach of a condition, inasmuch as a condition of re-entry in a lease could not at common law be apportioned. But this has now been altered by statute both in England (Law of Property Amendment Act 1859, S 3; Conveyancing Act 1881, S 12) and in many of the British colonies (e.g. Ontario, Rev. Stats., 1897, c. 170, S 9; Barbados, No. 12 of 1891, S 9). In the cases just mentioned there is apportionment in respect of estate by act of the parties.

_Apportionment by operation of law_ may be brought about where by act
of law a lease becomes inoperative as regards its subject-matter, or
by the "act of God" (as, for instance, where part of an estate is
submerged by the encroachments of the sea). To the same category
belongs the apportionment of rent which takes place under various
statutes (e.g. the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act 1845, S 119, when
land is required for public purposes; the Agricultural Holdings Act
1883, S 41, in the case of a tenant from year to year receiving notice
to quit part of a holding; and the Irish Land Act 1903, S 61,
apportionment of quit and crown rents).

_2. Apportionment in respect of Time._--At common law, there was no apportionment of rent in respect of time. Such apportionment was, however, in ceftain cases allowed in England by the Distress for Rent