Chapter IV: Curious Wills (5)

“Ninthly. My wearing apparel, furniture, books, and everything else I die possessed of, I bequeath to them who stand most in need of them, leaving it to the discretion of my executor, Mr. Edward Gulston, excepting the things after mentioned:--Unto Capt. Edward Menzies, late commander of the ship _Hibernia_, I give my sea quadrant, invented by Hadley, and made by Howell, in the Strand; likewise my two-feet Gunter’s scale. These I give him because I believe he knows the use of them better than any commander out of this port.

“My silver watch and buckles I give to Mr. Edward Gulston, in lieu of his sincere friendship to me during our acquaintance; and these I hope he will not part with, unless his necessities require it, which I sincerely hope will never be the case.

“Also to Mr. Thomas Forbes I give my gold ring with a blue stone set therein, which he may exchange for a mourning one if he pleases.

“I give my Bible and Prayer-book to the Rev. Mr. Henry Butler.

“My sword, with a cut-and-thrust blade, I give to Capt. Ransulie Knox, as I verily believe he not only knows how, but has courage to use it, and I hope only in a good cause.

“As I have lived the make-game of a modern gentleman, being a butt for envy and a mark for malice, by acting a little out of the common road, though, thank God, never in a base way, I hope I may die in sincere love and charity to all men, forgiving all my persecutors, as I hope for forgiveness from my Creator.

“As it lies not in my power to bequeath anything to my relations at home, I shall say nothing concerning them, as they have not for these six years past concerned themselves about me; excepting that I heartily wish them all well, and that my brothers and sisters may make a more prosperous voyage through this life than I have done.

“(Signed) DANIEL MARTINETT.”

* * * * *

This original and singular will was deposited in the Registry Office at Calcutta, Bengal, after the death of the testator, which took place in 1825: the governor of Bengal generously accepted the equivocal legacy of debts and paid them. Mr. Martinett was an officer of the well-known East India Company.

HAD A CLAMOROUS TONGUE

Mr. Lewis Evan Morgan, an old Welsh gentleman, died at Gwyllgyth, in Glamorganshire, in the ninety-eighth year of his age. His will is neatly comprised in few words very much to the purpose: “I give to my old faithful servant, Ester Jones, the whole that I am possessed of either in personal property, land, or otherwise. She is a tolerable good woman, but would be much better if she had not so clamorous a tongue. She has, however, one great virtue, which is a veil to all her foibles--strict honesty.”

HATED LAWYERS

General Hawley, who drew up his own will “because of the hatred and suspicion with which I regard all lawyers,” left “£100 to my servant Elizabeth Buskett because she has proved herself a useful and agreeable handmaid.” The rest of his belongings he bequeathed to his adopted son, but provided that, if he should be foolish enough to marry the said Elizabeth, neither was to inherit a farthing.

He desired his executors to consign his “carcase” to any place they pleased, and if the parish priest should claim a burial fee, they were to “let the puppy have it.”

A PEDLER AND HIS DOG

In the window at the west end of the nave at St. Mary’s, Lambeth, in London, may be seen a singular group representing a pedler with a pack on his back followed by a dog. Its age is not known, but it was there at the end of the sixteenth century. It is connected with a piece of land called Pedler’s Acre, anciently known as Church Hopys, which is entered in the parish register as bequeathed by a person unknown. A tradition preserved in the locality states that this isthmus was given to the parish to hold as long as the representation of himself and his dog was preserved in the church window.

HIS BROTHERS, WASHINGTON AND BONAPARTE

A resident of an Eastern State, who died recently, reflects in his will that he was shunned by his relatives, “who cannot, now that I am dying, do too much for my comfort.” But the testator, one Dr. Wagner, takes on these relations a ghastly revenge. To his brother, Napoleon Bonaparte, he bequeathed his left arm and hand; to another brother, George Washington, his right arm and hand; and to others his legs, nose, ears, etc. Further, the testator leaves a thousand dollars for the dismembering of his body.

WILL WRITTEN ON A DOOR

An eccentric testator, having been told that so long as the proper formalities required by the law of wills were complied with it was immaterial whether the said will were written on paper, parchment, canvas, or wood, elected to write his on his door. The executors had therefore no choice but to have the door unscrewed from its hinges and carried into court for probate before it could be administered. The author has not been able to locate the court in which this rather weighty will was probated, but its existence is well authenticated.

ON A CARD TORN FROM A FREIGHT CAR

A strange document was recently filed as a will in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Robert J. McElroy, after being fatally injured by a freight train, scribbled on a card torn from a freight car: “Mary, all that is mine is thine.” The will left an estate of $5200 to his wife. After writing the will, McElroy signed the letter “R,” but was unable to finish, and other trainmen completed the signature. McElroy died on June 12, 1910.

HIS WILL ON WRAPPING-PAPER

Joseph Dwyer of Weymouth, Massachusetts, died in October, 1910. His will was probated in the Norfolk County Court at Dedham. This will was unusual in that it was written on a piece of grocer’s brown wrapping-paper. Under it he gave to his wife an estate valued at $50,000. The will was held to be valid.

WILL ON A COLLAR BOX

Nicholas Zimmer was a passenger on the steamer, _Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse_, on a voyage from a European port to the United States, in October, 1910.

In mid-ocean, he mysteriously disappeared and undoubtedly jumped overboard. He was last seen on October 1, 1910, and his non-appearance at meals the following day led to a search of his cabin. Under a steamer rug was found a collar box, on the lid of which was written his last will and testament. A search of his papers disclosed that he was sixty years of age and an American.

During the voyage, he had spoken to many of his fellow-passengers, and had made friends with some of the stewards. He had in no wise acted strangely.

The will written on the lid of the collar box bequeathed seven hundred dollars in cash and ten thousand dollars in securities to his wife. This amount of cash, and the securities, were found in the box. When the steamer reached her dock, the government officials boarded the vessel, received the box and forwarded it to Mrs. Zimmer.

THREE-WORD WILL INVALID

Recently, the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia rejected the will of the late George T. Smith, of Richmond, which was composed of three words, “Everything is Lou’s,” in the suit of Samuel H. Smith, appellant, against Loula G. Smith.

These three words were written on a page of a book issued by the Southern Railroad Company to its employees for keeping records on trains.

The court held that such an instrument was not entitled to probate.

MAN MUST DRESS IN FEMALE ATTIRE

Money is so generally welcome that it is hardly conceivable that a legacy in cash would ever be refused. Occasionally, however, as a result of the absurdity or harshness of the conditions attached to legacies, substantial bequests of this kind have been declined. An Englishman refused a legacy of two hundred pounds because it was stipulated that before receiving it he must walk down the most important street of a fashionable summer resort (Brighton) “dressed in female attire.”

A LION SERMON

Sir John Gayer, a citizen of London, and lord mayor upwards of 200 years ago, left by will some money to provide for a sermon, which is preached at the Church of St. Katharine Cree, Leadenhall Street, every October, in commemoration of his being saved from a lion on the coast of Africa, in answer to prayer.

WHAT’S IN A NAME

A gentleman named Furstone of Alton Hampshire, England, about to make his will, and having no family, left seven thousand pounds to any man legitimately bearing the name of Furstone, who should discover and marry a female Furstone. If the marriage should result in children, the sum was to descend to the male offspring, if any, or to any child or children of the opposite sex who should, after marriage, retain the name.

WOULD NOT SPEAK TO THE LEGATEE

In 1772, John Edmunds, Esq., of Monmouth, England, bequeathed a fortune of upwards of twenty thousand pounds to one Mills, a day laborer, residing near Monmouth. Mr. Edmunds, who had so handsomely provided for this man, would not speak to or see him while he lived.

ONLY OUR SAVIOUR COULD DEMAND IT

Recently a cynical old man in a Western town died, who in his will devised all his property to that man in the community who could prove that he was a Christian. Then a definition of a Christian was given, which would exclude every one who had lived on earth, except the Saviour himself: the will was promptly set aside and the property given to the legal heirs.

TO THROW DICE FOR BIBLES

A dissenting minister bequeathed a sum of money to his chapel at St. Ives, to provide “six Bibles every year, for which six men and six women are to throw dice on Whit Tuesday after the morning service, the minister kneeling the while at the south end of the communion table, and praying God to direct the luck to His glory.”

TO A HERO OR HIS MISTRESSES

A somewhat puzzling task devolved upon a real or imaginary body of men in Pennsylvania. A Mr. Smith Willie, in 1880, appointed as executors of his extraordinary will, a jury of honor consisting of all the householders in his native town, who could prove that they came honestly by their fortunes, each to receive for his trouble the sum of two hundred dollars. He computed that there could not be above twenty, and doubted whether that number would be reached.

The will itself is thus indited:

“Seeing that I have no direct descendants, and that I am wholly unacquainted with those I may possess collaterally, I bequeath my fortune to any one among them who, in the course of a twelve-month from the date of my death, may distinguish himself by an act of heroism worthy of ancient times.

“In case none of my collateral descendants should be justified in making this claim, I then leave all I possess to be divided between all the women who can prove that they have been my mistresses, be it for ever so brief a period.”

IMPOSED ON THE NUNS

A sick traveller once presented himself at the hospital of Auxerre, in France, where he was received and treated with the care and attention bestowed on all the sick who seek an asylum there. He expressed his gratitude for the kindness shown him, and his intention of testifying it in a more substantial manner, begging the nuns to let him see a notary.

This functionary having obeyed his summons, he informed him that, as an old soldier, he was in the enjoyment of a retiring-pension, and, having earned a medal, of a further allowance; that, in addition to this income, he owned a mortgage worth four thousand five hundred francs, of which the title, as well as his other papers, was deposited with the notary of the commune of the Département du Seine et Marne, where he had a settlement. Upon this he dictated to him a will, by which he bequeathed everything to the hospital, upon the sole condition that they should give him a decent and honorable burial.

At this time he appeared to be recovering, but suddenly his state became worse, and on the following day he died.

To fulfil the promise exacted from them, the administrators of the hospital, instead of supplying the simple funeral ordinarily accorded to the paupers who died there, responded liberally to the behest of their generous benefactor, and accompanied his interment with every mark of respect, after which they went to the office indicated to claim the inheritance bestowed on them. But here a new feature appeared in the case. The mayor and the notary of the parish indicated, expressed themselves entirely ignorant whether of the papers in question or of the singular testator, and on further inquiry they discovered him to be no more than a wretched cowherd, bearing in his neighborhood a very suspicious character. What his motive could have been in practising this deception in his dying moments it is difficult to guess, and his conduct remains an instance of one of those crookednesses of the human mind we often meet with, but do not understand.

LEAVES ESTATE TO JESUS

One of the most unique wills ever recorded, was filed recently in Worcester, Massachusetts. The testator, Charles Hastings, leaves several garden lots and buildings, valued at fifty thousand dollars, to the Lord Jesus, with the explanation that He is the rightful owner of all lands, according to the Bible, the first book of Laws.

The instrument is an odd mixture of a deed and a will, and was drawn twenty-five years ago. According to the probate records, the instrument was given in consideration of the love and goodwill of the Lord and one cent found in one of the buildings conveyed.

There was a reservation in the instrument, giving the grantor the right to use the lands for life, and to improve and repair the houses and to pay taxes and insurance.

It may be safely surmised that the title to this property will vest in the heirs of the testator.

Mr. Hastings was a resident of Ashburnham and a well-known citizen.

A SPIRIT WILL

A spirit will was rejected in Washington, D.C., on August 12th, 1910, by Justice Barnard of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.

Mrs. Elida J. G. Crowell, widow of William H. Crowell, a clerk in the Treasury Department, applied to the court for the appointment of the deceased’s brother as administrator of his estate and offered in evidence what purported to be a translation of an illegible message, which Crowell scribbled while on his deathbed, favoring his brother’s appointment.

The court was unable to decipher the scrawl, but Mrs. Crowell said a “translation” had been made for her by a “slate-writing medium.” The “translation” in part read:

“Dear Elida,--

“This is what I tried to write on a slip of paper: ‘I want my brother, W. H. H. Crowell, Washington, U. S. A., if I should pass away with my sickness. I have perfect trust in him. I believe he will deal honestly with my children. I have set aside $5000 for the exclusive use of my wife. Give little Elizabeth and brother both $100 to put in the Savings Bank.’ Ruby met me. I have seen many folk here. This is a beautiful world. Is better than the Sixth Auditor’s office. They can’t put me out here.

“W. H. CROWELL.

“Date, June 7, 1910.”

MYSTERY OF A LITTLE TRUNK

On September 1st, 1910, Adolph Steinberg, an old German cobbler, died in Brooklyn, New York, at 36 Snyder Avenue. For a quarter of a century he had half-soled and mended shoes for those who lived in that section of the city. Mayor Gaynor was one of his customers, and many other prominent men used to go to his little shop to have their shoes repaired.

There always lay close to Steinberg’s feet, as he stitched away, a little metal trunk that was never out of his sight a moment during the day. It was never open, and no one ever caught a glimpse of its contents. At night it was placed under Steinberg’s bed, and in the morning he would pull it out and drag it over to his bench.

Steinberg’s solicitude for the trunk finally caused comment among his customers, and the report got out that the old cobbler kept his money and valuables there, and that a snug fortune was locked up in the little box. It was known that Steinberg was well to do, and for many years he used to lend out money to people who were temporarily out of funds. In such cases, he would get them to leave a watch or some other article of value as security. When they called to repay, Steinberg would return their valuables, charging them no interest for the money loaned.

In the course of many years, Steinberg accumulated quite a collection of watches and trinkets, because many of those to whom he lent money never came back to claim their valuables. So the collection grew and grew.

By his will Steinberg directed that the trunk be not opened until thirty days after his death. His wife and children respected his wish, and much to their satisfaction found it contained securities and other property of considerable value, an accumulation of many years.

DOLLY VARDEN GARTERS AND OTHER MATTERS

The following are extracts from some recent English wills: Thomas Blyth, after directing that no person was to wear mourning for him out of his money, goes on to say: “But I cannot forget the kindness of the ladies who have promised to wear Dolly Varden garters of black and white as a mark of respect for my memory.” William Hampton, after leaving to his son Lawrie’s “Interest Tables,” says he does so, “not from its intrinsic value, but from the hope that so small an incident may be of use to him in future years. And I particularly recommend to him the study of the compound interest tables, as showing that from comparatively small investments, by patience, large sums may be realized.” James Brown evidently believed in every man voting according to his own political convictions, for after leaving to a nephew two cottages, “for which he is to get his vote on,” adds, “and to vote the way which he likes best.” William Farren’s statement as to the character of Cambridge undergraduates is, we hope and believe, unfounded: he hopes by his disposition of his property, “to save his family from keeping or living in an undergraduate lodging-house, as undergraduates are more like wolves and dogs than human beings.”

OSTENTATION

Matthew Wall of Braughing, Hertfordshire, England, by will, in 1595, charged all his lands and tenements in the parish of Braughing with the yearly payment of twenty shillings, to be distributed by the minister and churchwardens on St. Matthew’s Day, in the following manner:

To the sexton, to make up his grave yearly, and to ring the bell, 1_s_. 10_d_. To twenty boys, between the age of six and sixteen, twenty groats. To ten aged and impotent people of the parish, ten threepences. To sweep the path from his house to the church-gate every year, 1_s_. To the crier of Stortford, to make proclamation yearly, on Ascension and Michaelmas Day, that he left his estate to a Matthew, or William Wall, as long as the world should endure, 8_d_. To the parish clerk at Hallingbury for the same, 8_d_., and to the minister and churchwardens, to see his will performed, 5_s_.

POWDER PLOT AND SPANISH ARMADA

Robert Wilcox, of Alcester, Warwickshire, England, by will, dated 24th of December, 1627, gave a house and grounds to the town of Alcester, for the maintenance of three sermons in the year, viz.:

“One upon the 5th of November, in remembrance of our happy deliverance, with our king, nobles and states, from the pestilent design of the Papists in the Powder Plot; one on the 17th of November, in remembrance of that good Queen Elizabeth, her entrance unto the Crown; and the third upon the last day of July, in remembrance of the Lord’s gracious deliverance from the Spanish Armada, in ’88.”

And whereas the rent was 20_s_. by the year then, and the good-wife, Lilly, having her life in it, after her decease no doubt the house and close would be worth 30_s_. by the year; then his will was that the said overplus should be given to the poor every year, as the rent should come in, forever.

MORE GENEROUS THAN POLITE

The will of Edward Wortley Montagu, son of Mr. Montagu, Ambassador to Constantinople in 1716, by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, his wife, the supposed “Sappho” of Pope, is more than singular. After some bequest “to my noble and worthy relation, the Earl of ----,” he adds, “I do not give his lordship any further part of my property because the best part of that he has contrived to take already. Item, to Sir Francis ---- I give one word of mine, because he has never had the good fortune to keep his own. Item, to Lord M---- I give nothing, because I know he’ll bestow it on the poor. Item, to ---- the author, for putting me in his travels, I give five shillings for his wit, undeterred by the charge of extravagance, since friends who have read his book consider five shillings too much. Item, to Sir Robert W---- I leave my political opinions, never doubting he can well turn them into cash, who has always found such an excellent market in which to change his own. Item, my cast-off habit of swearing oaths I give to Sir Leopold D----, in consideration that no oaths have ever been able to find him yet.”

From some quarrel with his family he advertised for some widow or single lady of good manners likely to bring him an heir in ---- months. This treasure to his arms his valet brought by his desire to meet him at Venice, from England; but as the ship of Wortley Montagu was entering the Venetian lagunes, to wed the chaste bride on the following day, the eager and expectant bridegroom swallowed too hastily a chicken bone, which, sticking in his throat, suffocated him in a few minutes.

TO ENCOURAGE MATRIMONY AND HORSE-RACING

By a deed, dated 12th of August, 1801, executed in pursuance of a decree in Chancery, relative to the will of John Perram of New Market, England, dated 30th of May, 1772, the trustees of a sum of £410 6_s_. 2_d_. Three Per Cent Consols and £21 Bank Long Annuities, being the original sum given by the will, together with such accumulations thereon which had accrued during the proceedings in Chancery, were declared; to hold them upon trust, six weeks at least before Easter, to cause notice to be given, as therein directed, that a marriage portion of £21 would be given to a parishioner of the said parish, who should, on Thursday in the Easter week, be married at the church to a woman belonging to it; neither party to be under twenty, nor to exceed twenty-five years of age, nor be worth £20; the trustees to attend in the vestry to receive claims, and pay the bequest to such couples as should be qualified to receive it. In case of two claims, the determination to be by ballot who should receive it. In case of no claimants, then the money, for that year only, to be paid by the trustees to the winner of the next town horse-race; the race course at New Market is four miles long and is regarded the finest in the world.

BEQUESTS OF THE HUMAN BRAIN

Both in France and the United States there exist medical societies which make a special study of the human brain. In the United States a regular blank form of testamentary bequest has been formulated, and the brains of a number of prominent persons, particularly those of doctors, have passed under its provisions; a form used is here given:

“I, ----, of ----, recognizing the need of studying the brains of educated and orderly persons rather than those of the ignorant, criminal or insane, in order to determine their weight, form, and fissural patterns, the correlations with bodily and mental powers of various kinds and degrees, and the influences of sex, age and inheritance, hereby declare my wish, that at my death, my brain shall be entrusted to the Cornell Brain Association, or to the Curator of the Collection of human brains, in the Museum of Cornell University, for scientific uses, and for preservation, as a whole or in part, as may be thought best. If my near relatives, by blood or marriage, object seriously to the fulfilment of this bequest, it shall be void. I earnestly hope that they may interpose neither objection nor obstacle.

“----.

Date ----

Witnesses:

----

----”

Medical works state that college professors are among the individuals best adapted to subserve the purposes indicated, by reason of their sharply defined capacities and attainments; lawyers, doctors and preachers seem to come next in favor.

It will be recalled that the late Florence Nightingale by will left her body for dissection and the cause of medical science.

MUST SETTLE DISPUTES

Mrs. Susan M. Corning died recently at Rockaway Beach, New York, leaving an estate valued at several thousand dollars. By an unusual clause in her will she appointed an arbitration committee to pass upon any dispute which might arise in the distribution of her estate. The clause reads:

“It is my express will and wish and I hereby order and direct that if any differences shall arise concerning any gift, bequest or other thing in this will, no suit shall be brought over the same, but the said difference shall be referred wholly to George Bennett, Louis Kreusher and Albert Meisel, all of Rockaway Beach, and what they order and direct shall be binding and conclusive to all persons concerned.”

There seems some reason to question the legality of such a provision.

LONG ON TROUSERS

A New Yorker dying in 1880 supposed to be sane, left this will:

“I bequeath all my fortune to my nephews and nieces, seven in number.

“They are to share it equally, and on no account to go to law about it, on pain of forfeiting their respective shares.

“I own seventy-one pairs of trousers, and I strictly enjoin my executors to hold a public sale at which these shall be sold to the highest bidder, and the proceeds distributed to the poor of the city.

“I desire that these garments shall in no way be examined or meddled with, but be disposed of as they are found at the time of my death; and no one purchaser is to buy more than one pair.”

As the testator had always been more or less eccentric in his ways, no one was much surprised at these singular clauses, which were religiously observed. The sale was held, and the seventy-one pairs of trousers were sold to seventy-one different purchasers. One of these, in examining the pockets, discovered in the fob a packet of some sort, closely sewn up. He lost no time in cutting the thread, and was not a little surprised to find a bundle of bank-notes representing a thousand dollars. The news soon spread, and each of the others found himself possessed of a similar amount.

As may be supposed, all were well satisfied except the heirs, who could not find redress in law, this recourse being prohibited.

COMPLICATION OVER HORSES

In a celebrated case, frequently quoted, the testator bequeathed to the plaintiff, “all my black and white horses.” Now the testator had six black horses, six white horses and six pied horses, and the question was whether the pied horses passed under the terms of the bequest. After elaborate argument, judgment was given for the plaintiff, and then it was moved in arrest of judgment that the pied horses were mares.

MUST MARRY “ANTON” OR “ANTONIE”

An eccentric Frenchman left his estate to his six nephews and six nieces on the condition that “every one of my nephews marries a woman named Antonie and that every one of my nieces marries a man named Anton.” They were further required to give the Christian name Antonie or Anton to every first-born child according to the sex. The marriage of each nephew was to be celebrated on one of the St. Anthony’s Days, either January 17th, May 10th, or June 13th, and if, in any instance, this last provision was not complied with before July, 1896, one-half of the legacy was in that case to be forfeited.

MUST SING ANTHEMS

Elizabeth Townsend of Westbury, Wilts, England, widow, by her will, dated 11th of June, 1820, gave unto the churchwardens and overseers of the parish of Westbury as much money as should be sufficient, when invested in the stocks, to yield the yearly sum of £3 clear of all deductions, upon trust to pay the dividends thereof unto the vicar, organist, parish clerk, and choir of the parish church of Westbury, for the time being, upon special condition that the said choir should forever thereafter, in the morning and afternoon service, at the parish church, on the Sunday preceding the 24th of June in each year, sing the anthem composed by her late husband’s grandfather, Roger Townsend, from the 150th Psalm, and also the 112th Psalm, for which the vicar was to have 4_s_., the organist 10_s_., the clerk 5_s_., and 4_s_. apiece to the choir singers, viz., two counter, two tenor, three treble, and three bass singers, and in default of their singing, then to divide such £3 amongst the poor at Christmas.

The same person made a similar bequest to the choir of the parish church of Warminster, Wilts.

WILL OF DR. DUNLOP

The humorous will of Dr. Dunlop of Upper Canada is worth recording, though there is a spice of malice in every bequest it contains.

To his five sisters he left the following bequests:

“To my eldest sister Joan, my five-acre field, to console her for being married to a man she is obliged to henpeck.

“To my second sister Sally, the cottage that stands beyond the said field with its garden, because as no one is likely to marry her it will be large enough to lodge her.

“To my third sister Kate, the family Bible, recommending her to learn as much of its spirit as she already knows of its letter, that she may become a better Christian.

“To my fourth sister Mary, my grandmother’s silver snuff-box, that she may not be ashamed to take snuff before company.

“To my fifth sister, Lydia, my silver drinking-cup, for reasons known to herself.

“To my brother Ben, my books, that he may learn to read with them.

“To my brother James, my big silver watch, that he may know the hour at which men ought to rise from their beds.

“To my brother-in-law Jack, a punch-bowl, because he will do credit to it.

“To my brother-in-law Christopher, my best pipe, out of gratitude that he married my sister Maggie whom no man of taste would have taken.

“To my friend John Caddell, a silver teapot, that, being afflicted with a slatternly wife, he may therefrom drink tea to his comfort.”

While “old John’s” eldest son was made legatee of a silver tankard, which the testator objected to leave to old John himself, lest he should commit the sacrilege of melting it down to make temperance medals.

VANITY FOLLOWS US TO THE GRAVE

John Troutbeck of Dacre, Cumberland, England, by will, dated 27th of October, 1787, gave to the poor of Dacre, the place of his nativity, £200, the interest thereof to be distributed every Easter Sunday on the family tombstone in Dacre churchyard, provided the day should be fine, by the hands and at the discretion of a Troutbeck of Blencowe, if there should be any living, those next in descent having prior right of distribution; and if none should be living that would distribute the same, then by a Troutbeck, as long as one could be found that would take the trouble of it; otherwise by the minister and churchwardens of the parish for the time being; that not less than five shillings should be given to any individual, and that none should be considered entitled to it that received alms, or any support from the parish.

TEMPERANCE AND EARLY RISING ENJOINED

In the will of the late Mr. J. Sargeant, of Leicester, England, who died some forty years ago, is the following clause: “As my nephews are fond of indulging themselves in bed in the morning, and as I wish them to prove to the satisfaction of my executors that they have got out of bed in the morning, and either employed themselves in business or taken exercise in the open air, from five to eight o’clock every morning from the fifth of April to the 10th of October, being three hours every day, and from seven to nine o’clock in the morning from the 10th of October to the 5th of April, being two hours every morning; this is to be done for some years, during the first seven years to the satisfaction of my executors, who may excuse them in case of illness, but the task must be made up when they are well, and if they will not do this, they shall not receive any share of my property. Temperance makes the faculties clear, and exercise makes them vigorous. It is temperance and exercise that can alone ensure the fittest state for mental or bodily exertion.”

PICTURE OF A VIPER AS A BEQUEST

The following is an extract from the will of John Hylett Stow, proved in 1781:

“I hereby direct my executors to lay out five guineas in the purchase of a picture of the viper biting the benevolent hand of the person who saved him from perishing in the snow, if the same can be bought for the money; and that they do, in memory of me, present it to ----, Esq., a king’s counsel, whereby he may have frequent opportunities of contemplating it, and, by a comparison between that and his own virtue, be able to form a certain judgment which is best and most profitable, a grateful remembrance of past friendship and almost parental regard, or ingratitude and insolence. This I direct to be presented to him in lieu of a legacy of three thousand pounds I had by a former will, now revoked and burned, left him.”

This will provoked a suit for libel, a proceeding not altogether unknown, for defamation contained in a testamentary document, though such proceedings are rare. Mr. John Marshall Gest of Philadelphia refers to this clause in his excellent address on “Practical Suggestions for Writing Wills.” It is also to be found in the “Curiosities of the Search Room,” an English work of the highest merit.

NO CRUELTY TO ANIMALS

_Grates v. Fraser._ This was a suit for the administration of the estate of the late Dr. Fraser, of Hampstead, England, who left a large amount of property to be distributed among various charities. The will, probated in 1878, contained several very singular clauses, one of which was to this effect: That he had previously left ten thousand pounds to the Senatus Academicus of the University of Edinburgh, for the purpose of founding certain bursaries connected with the medical profession, but having learnt that the horrible and atrocious practice prevailed there of performing unspeakably cruel operations and experiments on living animals, he now by his will cancelled the bequest, and desired to benefit the Scottish Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to a similar extent, since he could not reconcile it with his feelings to encourage, however remotely, the barbarous practice of vivisection. The testator also directed that his funeral should be conducted with as little parade as possible, without cloaks, hatbands, or scarfs, and that no feathers, wands, or other absurdities should be used on the occasion, and that the ridiculous display of hired mourners, mutes, or attendants, be dispensed with. Most sensible people, he continued, condemn the above useless customs, but nevertheless, from vanity or in blind obedience to antiquated usages, perpetuate and encourage them. He then directed his body to be buried in any cemetery, without reference to its being what was called “consecrated” or “unconsecrated” ground, or whether any service should be repeated at the grave or not, as these were matters about which he was utterly indifferent; they could avail him nothing, but might, if the weather were cold, cause the health of some friend to suffer.

WHISKEY TO EXTERMINATE THE IRISH

An English gentleman, who had from his earliest years been educated with the most violent prejudices against the Irish, came, when advanced in life, to inherit a considerable property in the county of Tipperary, but under the express condition that he should reside on the land. To this decree he very reluctantly conformed, but his feelings towards the natives only grew more bitter in consequence.

At his death some years after, on the 17th of March, 1791, his executors were extremely surprised on opening his will to find the following dispositions:

“I give and bequeath the annual sum of ten pounds, to be paid in perpetuity out of my estate, to the following purpose. It is my will and pleasure that this sum shall be spent in the purchase of a certain quantity of the liquor vulgarly called whisky, and it shall be publicly given out that a certain number of persons, Irish only, not to exceed twenty, who may choose to assemble in the cemetery in which I shall be interred, on the anniversary of my death, shall have the same distributed to them. Further, it is my desire that each shall receive it by half-a-pint at a time till the whole is consumed, each being likewise provided with a stout oaken stick and a knife, and that they shall drink it all on the spot. Knowing what I know of the Irish character, my conviction is, that with these materials given, they will not fail to destroy each other, and when in the course of time the race comes to be exterminated, this neighbourhood at least may, perhaps, be colonized by civilized and respectable Englishmen.”

MUST WAIT ONE HUNDRED YEARS

A very curious will was that of a Polish landlord, M. Zalesky, who died in 1889, leaving property valued at one hundred thousand roubles. His will was enclosed in an envelope bearing the words: “To be opened after my death.” Inside there was another envelope, “To be opened six weeks after my death.” When this time had passed, the second envelope was opened, and a third uncovered, “To be opened one year after my death.” At the end of the year, a fourth envelope was discovered, to be opened two years after the testator’s death; and so the game went on until 1894, when the actual will was discovered and read. The contents of this will were quite as eccentric as the directions attached to its opening. The testator bequeathed half his fortune to such of his heirs as had the largest number of children. The rest of the property was to be placed in bank, and a hundred years after his death to be divided, with the accumulated interest, among the will-maker’s descendants.

WILL OF AN IRISH MISER

An Irishman named Dennis Tolam, who died at Cork possessed of considerable wealth, in the year 1769, left a singular will, containing the following testamentary dispositions: “I leave to my sister-in-law four old stockings, which will be found under my mattress, to the right. Item: To my nephew, Michael Tarles, two odd socks and a green nightcap. Item: To Lieutenant John Stein, a blue stocking, with my red cloak. Item: To my cousin, Barbara Dolan, an old boot, with a red flannel pocket. Item: To Hannah, my housekeeper, my broken water-jug.” After the death of the testator, the legatees having been convened by the notary to be present at the reading of the will, each, as he or she was named, shrugged their shoulders and otherwise expressed a contemptuous disappointment, while parties uninterested in the succession could not refrain from laughing at these ridiculous, not to say insulting, legacies. All were leaving the room, after signifying their intention of renouncing their bequests, when the last-named, Hannah, having testified her indignation by kicking away the broken pitcher, a number of coins rolled out of it; the other individuals, astonished at the unexpected incident, began to think better of their determination, and requested permission to examine the articles given to them. It is needless to say that, on proceeding to the search, the stockings, socks, pocket, etc., soon betrayed by their weight the value of their contents; and the hoard of the testator, thus fairly distributed, left on the minds of the legatees a very different impression of his _worth_.

MUST NOT MARRY A DOMESTIC SERVANT

A curious and peculiarly hard case came before a Vice-Chancellor in London in 1880. The facts are as follows: A Miss Turner devised a large amount of real estate to her father for life, and then to her brother on these conditions: “But if my brother shall marry during my life without my consent in writing, or if he shall already have married, or hereafter shall marry, a domestic servant,” then such bequest to her brother was to be void. It appears the brother came into possession of the estate and died in 1898, leaving a widow and two children. Suit was instituted against the widow and children on the ground that the testatrix’s brother had forfeited his title to the legacy by marrying a domestic servant. It was contended on behalf of the widow that she had been a housekeeper, and not a domestic servant. The Vice-Chancellor, however, was of the opinion that a housekeeper was a domestic servant, and thus the legacy was forfeited.

TO SING IN OPERA

Stanislas Poltzmarz, a Hungarian, possessed of considerable wealth, and residing at Pesth, died about 1835, bequeathing the larger part of his fortune, consisting of three million florins, to a notary named Lotz, but stipulated that before claiming it he should engage himself at the Scala at Milan, to perform in the operas of “Otello” and “La Sonnambula.” The testator, who was eighty years of age, deprecates being considered in his dotage, and takes the trouble to explain that, having some few years before met the said Lotz at an evening party, where he had sung fragments of the parts of Elvino and Otello, he had admired the beauty of his tenor voice, and predicted that it only depended on himself to become the favorite of the whole musical world. “If, therefore,” he concludes, “I am right, he will thank me, and so will all _dilettanti_, for my acumen; if, on the other hand, he should fail, he will have money enough to compensate for the hisses he may incur.”

HAIR OF THE PROPHET’S BEARD

“The Prophet’s Beard Case,” which created a sensation among the followers of the Prophet at Madras, was called on for final disposal before Mr. Justice Innes, Acting Chief Justice, in August, 1879. The subject of dispute was a hair of the Prophet’s beard, which is enclosed in a case and is called the “Aussaree Shareef,” or sacred relic, and in connection with which the Government allows a monthly pension of Rs. 47-14-4, obtained from funds left by a late Nabob for the purpose of carrying out ceremonies in connection with the sacred relic. There were, when the case was first instituted, no less than six claimants, two by right of a will, the others claiming it in succession from generations. Two of the claimants and the plaintiff withdrew from the suit, leaving only four to establish their rights to the sacred heirloom. His lordship, in a lengthy judgment, decided that the first, third, and fourth defendants were entitled to the sacred relic; but as the first defendant was a woman she could not hold office in connection with it, and as No. 3 was the elder brother of No. 4, he directed that he should hold the “Aussaree Shareef,” and perform all ceremonies in connection with it, making three equal shares of whatever remained from the allowance after their performance.

JOKE ON HIS FRIENDS

Mr. Arbirlot, a Scotch gentleman, left extremely handsome legacies to a number of his friends. The lawyer who wrote down his wishes, looked up from time to time to ascertain whether his client could be in earnest; at last he could not refrain from asking him whether he was sure his assets would cover all these bequests. At this the humorous testator burst out laughing, admitting that of course they wouldn’t, only he didn’t like to go out of the world without leaving the expression of his regard for these legatees, by showing what he _would_ have done for them if he had _had_ the means. No doubt the intention was a benevolent one; but we doubt whether the joke was one calculated to be received in a spirit of affectionate gratitude, especially by the executors, whose equanimity would have been put to a severe test had the puzzle not been explained before the testator’s death.

A REMARKABLE ANNUITY

A county newspaper some years ago recorded the death of a Major Hook, and spoke of him as “a singular character.” “He died,” says the report, “on Monday sennight, at his house, Ham Street, Ham Common. He was an officer in the East India Company’s service, and reached the age of seventy-five. His house was remarkable for its dingy and dilapidated condition.”

His wife had become entitled to a life annuity, bequeathed to her in these ambiguous terms: “And the same shall be paid to her as long as she is above ground.” When, therefore, the good lady died, her husband very naturally objected to forfeit this income by putting her _below_ ground; and ingeniously devised a mode of keeping her in a room which he allotted “to her sole and separate use,” placing a glass-case over her remains. For thirty years he thus prolonged his enjoyment, if not of his wife’s society, at least of her income.

TO HELP YOUNG NEWSPAPER MEN

William J. Haskett, a lawyer, who died in New York in 1890, left a will containing this curiously worded clause: “I am informed that there is a society composed of young men connected with the public press; and as in early life I was connected with the papers, I have a keen recollection of the toils and troubles that bubbled then and ever will bubble for the toilers of the world in their pottage caldron; and as I desire to thicken with a little savory herb their thin broth in the shape of a legacy, I do hereby bequeath to the New York Press Club of the City of New York, $1000, payable on the death of Mrs. Haskett.”

ANGELIC VIRTUE REQUIRED

Not long ago, a wealthy gentleman on Long Island died, who provided that none of his heirs should inherit, unless they could show that they had led a life of angelic virtue. Among the conditions mentioned, were these: That they should not smoke or drink; that they should rise every morning and breakfast at a certain hour; that they should be in the house every evening at a certain hour; that they should be industrious and strictly moral; that they should never enter a barroom, and should not get married before the age of twenty-five. It is stated that the heirs were practically disinherited, all but one having failed to live up to the conditions.

BARE ARMS IMMODEST

A rector of a Yorkshire parish, who died in 1804, left a considerable property to his only daughter under the following conditions:

1st. That she should not marry unless with the consent of his two executors, and

2d. That she should dress with greater propriety than theretofore.

This clause was worded thus: “Seeing that my daughter Anna has not availed herself of my advice touching the objectionable practice of going about with her arms bare up to the elbows, my will is that, should she continue after my death in this violation of the modesty of her sex, all the goods, chattels, moneys, land, and other property that I have devised to her for the maintenance of her future life shall pass to the oldest of the sons of my sister Caroline. Should anyone take exception to this my wish as being too severe, I answer that license in dress in a woman is a mark of a depraved mind.”

A FANATICAL BAPTIST MINISTER

The will (dated March 26th, 1874) of the Rev. William Hill, late of Lansdowne Villas, Springfield Road, Cotham, Bristol, Baptist minister, who died on November 11, 1879, was proved at the district registry, Bristol, by Emerson Geerish and Thomas Bowbeer, the executors, under three thousand pounds. After the death of his wife he gives to the Society for the Relief of Aged and Infirm Baptist Ministers, instituted in Bath, 1816, and to the Baptist Foreign Missionary Society, each one hundred pounds. The testator directs “the payment of all my just debts, funeral and testamentary expenses, as soon as conveniently may be after my departure to heaven; but, as this is to be my final public document, I shall here record my detestation of all State establishments of religion, believing them to be anti-scriptural and soul-ruining. I have for years prayed the King of Zion to overthrow the politico-ecclesiastical establishment of the British Empire, and I leave the world with a full conviction that such prayer must ere long be answered. I thirst to see the Church brought down, the Church by man set up, for millions are by it led on to drink a bitter cup. I desire all posterity to know that William Hill was a conscientious Trinitarian Baptist Minister, and that he believed infant sprinkling to be from his Satanic Majesty, the keystone of Popery, therefore the parent of unnumbered terrible evils; this delusion must also pass away at the Divinely-appointed time, and the immersion of believers, as plainly taught by the Great Teacher, the Holy Ghost, and the Apostles, shall one day universally triumph. Man says, some water in the face, and that before the child has grace, is what is meant in Jesus’ word, by being buried in the Lord. The deadly drinking customs of professors and non-professors are likewise doomed. Heaven dash all error, sin, and the devil from the earth, and cause truth, holiness, and Christ everywhere to prevail. Amen.”

THREE TESTAMENTARY GEMS

The three testamentary gems following are to be found in one volume of the Pennsylvania State Reports:

NUMBER ONE

“February the 28, 1858.

“the requeste of tresse Carey i
want ransler Carey to hav my plase
as long as he shall live i want drusilla Carey
to stay and keepe house for hur father and
marten i want mr carey to give lovica shoop wone
shale wone pare of
stockings Rozanner dark wone coveled i want
cathern stanten
to hav my cloak and to Dresses
i want (erasure) mr carey to give
Won hundred Dolars two the methodus
Church I want drusila carey to hav
all my household property as soon as i am ded.
and after mr carey is ded i
want drusila (erasure) (erasure)
carey two hav my farm.
her
Tereisse X carey”
mark

NUMBER TWO

“In the Name of god I Samull Eddinger
of Moore Township County of Northampton
State of Penn Do make this my Last will
and testament as follows
that is to Say my Disire
my son John he Shall have one
thousand Dollars in Advance before
any of the heirs Shall hav any money
from my Estate personal property
first my Son John Shall Settle up all
my Depts funeral Expace &c.
till all is paid
my Son John he shall setle
my personal property as soon
it is Posible
he shall pay the of the money from
my personal goods the half of
the money to my Daughter Margret and
what is Left from the Balence of
the Thousand Dollrs he tookt of for
himself
my Son John Shall pay to my
Daughter Margret an Annally one a
Hundred and twenty five Dollars for her
Natural Life time or as long she
will Liv in this World
and my Son John he shall have
all my Real Estate for his own
property as Soon my Daughter is Deased
my Son John Shall not pay any Longer
Not to her heirs and to nobody
it be Stopt.”

NUMBER THREE

The third runs as follows: “it to be understood that any of my grandchildren who shall be guilty of having an illegitimate child, or of the sin of intemperance, or that do wickedly and illegitimately profane God’s holy name, he, she, or they, to forever debar themselves from the benefit of any bequest,” and that the shares of offending ones should be divided amongst their brothers and sisters, “whose life and conversation is free from reproach.”

CLAIMING TO BE THE SON OF A KING