yesterday my trust law class was considering whether a purpose trust for the reintroduction of tigers to singapore and the establishment of a safe reserve for them would be valid under the charitable trust exception. one might run a (quite feeble) environmental argument about public benefit along the lines of diversity of wildlife and protection of endangered species, but in our hearts we knew very well we are now long past the age of sang nila utama coming ashore on temasek (prof p, who appears aware of the legend: aren’t tigers part of the natural jurisdiction of singapore? us: ahaha.) furthermore, we ought consider there might even be a public detriment: afterall, prof p. mused, tigers are “dangerous ravenous beasts” and that “not only will some people object” but “ultimately some people will get eaten.”i do like the inexorable fatalism of his conclusions.
Best of the Transparent Hummingbird