1. In Exhibit B, to which all the members of the branch to which the plaintiff's husband belonged were parties, it was agreed that the charities were to be managed by the head of the family in each branch for the time being. We think the language clearly points to the intention that the management should be in the hands of the male head and not in the hands of females like the plaintiff. It is true that subsequently one of the widows asserted her right of management against the plaintiff's husband, but after obtaining a decree she gave up her right for a money compensation. The other fact relied on is that in Exhibit D series the leases were made out in the names of the female as well as the male members; but this appears to be accounted for by the fact that the branches were improperly dividing the trust properties among themselves and making payments for the performance of the charities, whereas it is now admitted that they had no beneficial interest in the charity properties. On the whole we are unable to agree with the Subordinate Judge that the plaintiff has proved her right of management. On this ground, the suit fails, and the appeal must be allowed and the plaintiff's suit dismissed with costs throughout.