The commentators in the field of future interests have, for the most part, agreed there is a trend in the law toward piercing the fictional veil that a general power is a mere mandate or authority to dispose of property. The purpose of this article is to explore, in summary, the historical basis for the general power and the reasons for the current prevalence of its use. The question of whether the general power does have peculiar characteristics and advantages in intent effectuation is evaluated in more detail. In addition, the law as it relates to the rights of third parties claiming through or against the donee of the power (creditors, spouse, and heirs) is critically examined with a view to determining to what extent the donee\u27s power is and should be treated as a property interest. Suggestions as to recommended changes in the law are advanced. Such changes of necessity would have to be by statute because of the properly strong judicial predisposition toward the doctrine of stare decisis in the property area. In traversing all these problems, the distinctions between a testamentary power and a power presently exercisable as well as between powers simply collateral, in gross, and appendant are of some convenience and should be kept in mind
