Section 14-301 gives the courts of equity full jurisdiction to enforce a charitable trust upon a suit by the Attorney General or a suit by any person having “an interest in the enforcement of the trust.” The Restatement (Second) of Trusts § 391 provides: “A suit can be maintained for the enforcement of a charitable trust by the Attorney General or other public officer, or by a co-trustee or by a person who has a special interest in the enforcement of the charitable trust, but not by persons who have no special interest or by the settlor or his heirs, personal representatives or next-of-kin.” In other words, the general rule appears to be that the settlor has no special interest in the enforcement of his or her charitable trusts. See, e.g., Carl J. Herzog Found., Inc. v. Univ. of Bridgeport, 243 Conn. 1, 699 A.2d 995 (1997) (interpreting Connecticut’s version of § 14-301 which is identical to that of Maryland). Maryland has liberal rules regarding standing to object to the operation of a charitable trust. In Gordon v. Baltimore, 258 Md. 682, 267 A.2d 98 (1970), a taxpayer in his status as taxpayer was granted standing to sue to prevent the transfer of the Peabody Institute library to another Baltimore library.[1]  Given the rule in Gordon, a settler as a taxpayer presumably would have standing under the liberal Maryland rule to object to the operation of a charitable trust. To date, this issue of standing has not been resolved by Maryland courts. [1] This case gives a wonderful history of George Peabody’s interests and the history of the Peabody Institute in Baltimore and the Peabody Institute also created by George Peabody in Nashville, Tennessee which is now part of Vanderbilt University.