Testator left his realty in trust to apply the net income, after the payment of certain expenses, eighty percent to the use of a charity and certain persons. the other twenty percent to a sinking fund "to restore, replace or make major improvements or additions to the buildings and improvements" of that realty. The income from the accumulated fund was to be paid to the charity; the principal expended at such times as the trustees deemed necessary. It was claimed the provision for this fund constituted an unlawful direction to accumulate income. Held: that income applied to the replacement of buildings was not an accumulation, and since funds might be accumulated for twenty-one years under statute, the court could not say that any income was now unlawfully accumulated or would be unexpended at the end of that period.