ROBERTS, Justice.
We shall treat this appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, since it appears from the record that the order to be reviewed is not a final decree. Section 59.45, Florida Statutes 1941, as amended, F.S.A.
All that need be considered is the holding by the Chancellor below, confirming the report of the General Master, to the effect that a conveyance from X to Y, as trustee for A, B, and C, in and of itself created a valid express trust.
A trust may be created by the execution of a conveyance in trust. The conveyance, however, must contain the essential elements of a trust. One of these so-called essentials is an intention of the settlor specifically to create a trust and not to do something else. Vol. 1, Bogert on Trusts and Trustees, § 45, et seq. With respect to the instrument before us, the only intent, as shown by all the evidence, to be existent in the mind of the grantor, purported settlor X, was the intent to transfer the property. The conflict of testimony arose, in one respect, as to whether or not Y had agreed to acquire this property in trust for A, B, and C. If there were such an agreement, the effect of this instrument at most would be to constitute the writing necessary, in view of the Statute of Frauds, to lay the foundation for the introduction of evidence tending to prove the entering into of a trust agreement between Y, A, B, and C.
We find that the holding by the court below to the effect that the deed, ipso facto, created an express trust, was clearly erroneous.
The Chancellor is directed to proceed to final hearing in the cause and to determine, on the basis of all the evidence, whether or not a resulting or constructive trust exists. If he finds that there is a resulting or constructive trust, he should find and determine the proportionate share of each of the beneficiaries therein.
Certiorari granted.
CHAPMAN, Acting Chief Justice, and THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.