Chapter V: Testamentary and Kindred Miscellany (1)

“Let the world slide, let the world go,
A fig for care, and a fig for woe!
If I can’t pay, why I can owe,
And death makes equal the high and low.”

TESTAMENTARY CAPACITY

The following was copied a short time ago from a legal journal: a stranger on horseback was passing through a country village; a church was being moved, and he asked a resident the reason; the latter answered:

“Well, stranger, I’m mayor of these here diggin’s, an’ I’m fer law enforcement. We’ve got an ordenance what says no saloon shall be nearer than three hundred feet to a church. I give ’em jest three days to move the church.”

I mean no disrespect in linking this decision of the Mayor with that of the Supreme Court of one of our great Western States.

That Supreme Court recently handed down a decision on testamentary capacity. It would seem that extreme mental obliquity is not a bar to will-making: here is the syllabus in the case:

“That where the testator used excessive amounts of a patent kidney medicine and recommended it to his friends for all kinds of diseases; manifested a hitherto unknown desire to make political speeches, and was positive in his utterances that certain candidates should not be permitted to run for office, and that Bryan was not honest and McKinley was not fit to be President, and that he could make a better President than McKinley; got up at night and sang Psalms; took his dogs and went hunting at night, though he got no game, and had not in former years been known to hunt; exhibited his stallion and other stock at church meetings, and failed to recognize acquaintances; carried on disconnected conversations, had a roaring in his head, used coal oil in his ears, and poured coal oil on trees and when it killed them said he had no sense,--neither these eccentricities nor other peculiarities like them show a want of capacity to make a will.”

This testator was a being of a high order of reasoning as compared with many such cases to be met with. Old Diogenes said: “Most men are within a finger’s breadth of being mad; for if a man walk with his middle finger pointing out, folk will think him mad, but not so if it be his forefinger.”

Ordinary mortals are very strict in measuring craziness: even a slight divergence from the normal standard, or their standard of normality, causes them to adjudge their neighbors crazy: the courts are, however, much more lenient in their judgments in dealing with matters testamentary, and seem inclined to the view that all men are sane, only some are less so: or, as the Kentuckian says of a certain liquid produced in his State, “It’s all good but some better than others”; in fact, that weird performances and peculiar actions are indications of individuality and not of mental incapacity. The Supreme Court of North Carolina has decided that while a failure to go to church is a moral delinquency, yet it does not unfit a man to make a will.

The Supreme Court of New York has decided that though one believe in all the abominations and wanton rites of ancient Greece and Rome, and in sincerity worship Egypt’s wandering gods, disguised in brutish form, or, like the Hindoo, stand for a lifetime on one leg to secure salvation, or be yet a howling dervish, and rave and gash his naked body, thinking he is doing God service, yet he may be able to transact the affairs of life or dispose suitably of his property.

Any number of individuals have been accused of inability to make their last wills on account of an inclination to hunt for hidden treasures. One such in New York State took with her her nephew, and had him carry a red rooster under his arm for good luck, and they dug diligently, but found no gold. She left gold, however, but not so apportioned as to suit her relatives, and a will contest followed. Another person bandaged his face with handkerchiefs, to prevent false impressions being made on his mind: probably he did not succeed, yet his will was sustained. One gentleman charged his wife with putting tongs in his bed to make him uneasy. Whether hot or cold tongs, is not stated by the decision of the Supreme Court of Connecticut; but the Court did decide that such an offence was more often chargeable to the heart than to the head.

A belief in perpetual motion, and a denial of the revolution of the earth on its axis, and assertions that “the sun do move,” have not been sufficient to undermine testamentary capacity, according to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Frequent efforts have been made to show that marriage late in life was evidence of insanity, but always unsuccessfully.

The Supreme Court of Connecticut held that it was a perfectly natural trait for the aged to tell favorite stories and to embellish them a little more or less, as fancy prompted.

A woman’s fondness for gossip, and the constant changing of her mind in regard to the arrangement of the house she was building and the color of paints used for it, were insufficient reasons for setting aside her will: on the contrary, the Court intimated that it was perfectly natural that she should change her mind and that the workmen should be scolded. Certain it is, that one feature of this decision has long been sustained by custom.

The same Court, the Supreme Court of Michigan, decided that a disposition on the part of an individual to give his services to the United States Government in the management of its financial affairs, did not necessarily show insanity, and added that if it did, most of us would not escape.

So, after contemplating some of these peculiar and generally uncomfortable departures from the straight line of human conduct, one feels that Dryden spoke by the card when he said, “There is a pleasure sure in being mad which none but madmen know.”

PRACTICAL SUGGESTIONS FOR WRITING WILLS

Mr. John Marshall Gest, a prominent member of the Philadelphia Bar, delivered an address to the students of the Law School of the University of Pennsylvania, October 17th, 1907, on “Practical Suggestions for Writing Wills.” It is by far the most entertaining and erudite composition the author has ever read on the subject. It can be found in the American Law Register for November, 1907, Volume 55, No. 8. Mr. Gest opens his address in the following words:

“Every man who knows how to write thinks he knows how to write a will, and long may this happy hallucination possess the minds of our lay brethren, for surely St. Ives, the Patron Saint of lawyers, extends to none a heartier welcome in the life beyond than to the Jolly Testator who makes his own Will.”

Too little is recorded of this Patron Saint of the legal profession. The author offers the following information concerning him:

Over in France, on its western shore, is a peninsula, the province of Bretagne, or Brittany, and on its rock-bound coast the waves of the Atlantic forever beat; it derives its name from the fact that during early history, the inhabitants of Great Britain, in times of local strife, left their native country, and went to Brittany to reside. This province is one of the most interesting portions of Europe, being rich in history and Celtic ruins, and its landscapes are said to be surprisingly beautiful; its people still retain their ancient language and customs.

In the year 1253, there was born in Brittany, of a noble family, one Yves-Helori, who is recognized the world over as the Patron Saint of lawyers; he espoused the cause of the orphan, the widow, and the poor; he was greatly honored by his countrymen, and was canonized by Clement VI at Avignon; many monuments have been erected and hymns written to perpetuate his virtues and his memory; he died at the age of fifty years, and on a tablet in one of the churches of Brittany are these words in Latin:

“St. Ives was of Brittany;
He was a lawyer, and not a robber,
At which the people wondered.”

Following the opening words of his address, Mr. Gest says: “But with deference to amateur lawyers, it is by no means easy to draw a proper will. Lord Coke said, in Butler and Baker’s case, one which had been argued twenty-one times, “I find great doubts and controversies daily arise on devises made by last wills, in respect of obscure and insensible words and repugnant sentences, the will being made in haste, and some pretend that the testator in respect of extreme pain was not _compos mentis_ and divers other scruples and questions are moved upon wills. But if you please to devise your lands by will, make it by good advice in your perfect memory and inform your Counsel truly of the estates and tenures of your land, and by God’s Grace the resolution of the Judges in this case will be a good direction to learned counsel to make your will according to law and thereby prevent questions and controversies.”

“For some three centuries,” adds Mr. Gest, “this sound advice has been open to him who would read it, and yet testators have such a reluctance to pay a fee to a lawyer, that they will draw their wills themselves, sometimes with the assistance of Dunlap, or have them, as Lord Coke says in the preface to the second Volume of his Reports, ‘Intricately, absurdly and repugnantly set down by parsons, scriveners and such other imperites.’”

Sir Edward Coke died in 1634; as is well known, he was one of the Chief Justices of England. His ardent support of liberal measures in Parliament, especially the right of Freedom of Debate, brought him into trouble, and he suffered nine months’ imprisonment in the Tower of London. He had great popularity, and his utterances and courage did much to contribute to the final result in the struggle between the Crown and Commons. His books are still regarded as authoritative treatises on English Law.

A LAST WILL

The following prose poem was written by Mr. Williston Fish, a prominent lawyer of Chicago, Illinois: Mr. Fish still resides in Chicago. The will is a sentimental and purely fanciful creation: it first appeared in “Harper’s Weekly” in 1898, and is reproduced here by permission of Messrs. Harper and Brothers. The will has become one of the classics of American literature, and has been published and republished by newspapers and magazines throughout the English-speaking world. The original from the pen of Mr. Fish varies slightly from the copy here given, this production having been embellished somewhat by various editors. It has sometimes been designated as the “Insane Man’s Will,” and Mr. Fish has been deluged with inquiries on the subject: the history given above, however, is based on personal investigation made by the author.

* * * * *

“He was stronger and cleverer, no doubt, than other men, and in many broad lines of business he had grown rich, until his wealth exceeded exaggeration. One morning, in his office, he directed a request to his confidential lawyer to come to him in the afternoon. He intended to have his will drawn. A will is a solemn matter, even with men whose lives are given up to business, and who are by habit mindful of the future. After giving this direction he took up no other matter, but sat at his desk alone and in silence.

“It was a day when summer was first new. The pale leaves upon the trees were starting forth upon the still unbending branches. The grass in the parks had a freshness in its green like the freshness of the blue in the sky and of the yellow of the sun--a freshness to make one wish that life might renew its youth. The clear breezes from the south wantoned about, and then were still, as if loath to go finally away. Half idly, half thoughtfully, the rich man wrote upon the white paper before him, beginning what he wrote with capital letters, such as he had not made since, as a boy in school, he had taken pride in his skill with the pen:

“I, Charles Lounsbury, being of sound mind and disposing memory, do hereby make and publish this my last will and testament, in order as justly as may be to distribute my interest in the world among succeeding men.

“That part of my interest which is known in law and recognized in the sheep-bound volumes as my property, being inconsiderable and of no account, I make no disposal of in this my will.

“My right to live, being but a life estate, is not at my disposal, but these things excepted all else in the world I now proceed to devise and bequeath:

“Item: I give to good fathers and mothers, in trust for their children, all good little words of praise and encouragement, and all quaint pet names and endearments, and I charge said parents to use them justly and generously, as the needs of their children may require.

“Item: I leave to children inclusively, but only for the term of their childhood, all and every, the flowers of the fields and the blossoms of the woods, with the right to play among them freely, according to the customs of children, warning them at the same time against thistles and thorns. And I devise to children the banks of the brooks, and the golden sands beneath the waters thereof, and the odors of the willows that dip therein, and the white clouds that float high over the giant trees. And I leave the children the long, long days to be merry in, in a thousand ways, and the night and the moon and the train of the Milky Way to wonder at, but subject nevertheless to the rights hereinafter given to lovers.

“Item: I devise to boys jointly all the useful idle fields and commons where ball may be played; all pleasant waters where one may swim; all snow-clad hills where one may coast and all streams and ponds where one may fish, or where, when grim Winter comes, one may skate; to have and to hold the same for the period of their boyhood. And all meadows with the clover blossoms and butterflies thereof, the woods and their appurtenances, the squirrels and birds, and echoes and strange noises, and all distant places which may be visited, together with the adventures there found, and I give to said boys each his own place at the fireside at night, with all pictures that may be seen in the burning wood, to enjoy without let or hindrance, and without any incumbrance of care.

“Item: I give and bequeath to girls all beauty and gentleness; and to them I give the crown of purity and innocence which is theirs by right of birth and sex; and also in due season the abiding love of brave and generous husbands, and the divine trust of motherhood.

“Item: To young men jointly I devise and bequeath all boisterous, inspiring sports of rivalry, and I give to them the disdain of weakness and undaunted confidence in their own strength, though they are rude. I give them the power to make lasting friendships and of possessing companions, and to them exclusively I give all merry songs and brave choruses, to sing with lusty voices.

“Item: To lovers, I devise their imaginary world, with whatever they may need, as the stars of the sky, the red roses by the wall, the bloom of the hawthorn, the sweet strains of music, and aught else by which they may desire to figure to each other the lastingness and beauty of their love.

“Item: And to those who are no longer children or youths or lovers, I leave memory, and I bequeath to them the volumes of the poems of Burns and Shakespeare and of other poets, if there be others, to the end that they may live over the old days again, freely and fully, without tithe or diminution.

“Item: To our loved ones with snowy crowns I bequeath the happiness of old age, the love and gratitude of their children, until they fall asleep.”

THE LAWYER’S BEST FRIEND

A hundred years ago, English lawyers, when dining together, used to drink to the health of “The Schoolmaster,” for schoolmasters then often drew up wills for people, and by their ignorance of legal technicalities gave the gentlemen of the long robe much remunerative business. “To the lawyers’ best friend--the man who makes his own will,” was also a regular toast at dinners of the Bar.

The following poem is inscribed to the legal profession:

THE JOLLY TESTATOR WHO MAKES HIS OWN WILL

“Ye lawyers who live upon litigants’ fees,
And who need a good many to live at your ease;
Grave or gay, wise or witty, whate’er your degree,
Plain stuff or State’s Counsel, take counsel of me:--
When a festive occasion your spirit unbends,
You should never forget the profession’s best friends:
So we’ll send round the wine, and a light bumper fill
To the jolly testator who makes his own will.

“He premises his wish and his purpose to save
All dispute among friends when he’s laid in his grave;
Then he straightway proceeds more disputes to create
Than a long summer’s day would give time to relate.
He writes and erases, he blunders and blots,
He produces such puzzles and Gordian knots,
That a lawyer intending to frame the thing ill,
Couldn’t match the testator who makes his own will.

“Testators are good, but a feeling more tender
Springs up when I think of the feminine gender!
The testatrix for me, who, like Telemaque’s mother,
Unweaves at one time what she wove at another.
She bequeathes, she repeats, she recalls a donation,
And ends by revoking her own revocation;
Still scribbling or scratching some new codicil,
Oh! success to the woman who makes her own will.

“‘Tisn’t easy to say, ’mid her varying vapors,
What scraps should be deemed testamentary papers.
’Tisn’t easy from these her intention to find,
When perhaps she herself never knew her own mind.
Every step that we take, there arises fresh trouble:--
Is the legacy lapsed? Is it single or double?
No customer brings so much grist to the mill,
As the wealthy old woman who makes her own will.

“The law decides questions of meum and tuum,
By kindly consenting to make the thing suum,
The Æsopian fable instructively tells,
What becomes of the oysters, and who gets the shells.
The legatees starve, but the lawyers are fed;
The Seniors have riches, the Juniors have bread;
The available surplus of course will be nil,
From the worthy testator who makes his own will.

“You had better pay toll when you take to the road,
Than attempt by a by-way to reach your abode;
You had better employ a conveyancer’s hand,
Than encounter the risk that your will shouldn’t stand.
From the broad beaten track when the traveler strays,
He may land in a bog, or be lost in a maze;
And the law, when defied, will avenge itself still,
On the man and the woman who make their own will.”

INGERSOLL ON DECORATION DAY

Robert G. Ingersoll died at Dobbs Ferry, New York, July 21, 1899. He left no will. A number of his great speeches were funeral orations. The following extract from an address made on Decoration Day to the Soldiers at Indianapolis, Indiana, is regarded as the most touching example of imagery and vision to be found in English literature:

“The past rises before me like a dream. Again we are in the great struggle for national life. We hear the sound of preparation--the music of the boisterous drums, the silver voices of heroic bugles. We see thousands of assemblages, and hear the appeals of orators; we see the pale cheeks of women and the flushed faces of men; and in those assemblages we see all the dead whose dust we have covered with flowers. We lose sight of them no more. We are with them when they enlist in the great army of freedom. We see them part from those they love. Some are walking for the last time in quiet woody places with the maidens they adore. We hear the whisperings and the sweet vows of eternal love as they lingeringly part forever. Others are bending over cradles, kissing babies that are asleep. Some are receiving the blessings of old men. Some are parting who hold them and press them to their hearts again and again, and say nothing; and some are talking with wives, and endeavoring with brave words spoken in the old tones to drive from their hearts the awful fear. We see them part. We see the wife standing in the door, with the babe in her arms--standing in the sunlight sobbing; at the turn of the road a hand waves--she answers by holding high in her loving hands the child. He is gone--and forever.”

ELEGY ON A WIFE

A tender and touching tribute to a deceased wife by Mr. Mitchell Kennerley, of New York, is contained in “Thysia, an Elegy”; this beautiful little volume was issued about a year ago, and is one of the profoundest utterances of grief appearing in print in recent years.

The lines below are taken from the poem “Alone,” which is typical of the contents of the volume:

ALONE

“The bier, the bell, the grave, silence, and night;
And you are laid in that cold ground, and gone.
I hardly missed my love till now;--O light
Of my worn, weary life, dark, dark, alone,
Blindly I feel your empty pillowed place;
O sacred head, luxuriant hair, and arm
Through the dim hours linked in some dear embrace,
Lips pressed to mine, and bosom beating warm,
Breath, than the evening breath of heaven more sweet,
Words faltering, passion-mixed, or sighed with prayer,
Shy, soft caresses of the hand, to greet
Or tell some passing need, or gentle care--
O love, all these have been; ah, woe is me,
For you are gone, and these no more shall be.

A MEMORY

“I think the gentle soul of him
Goes softly in some garden place,
With the old smile time may not dim
Upon his face.

“He was a lover of the spring,
With love that never quite forgets,
Surely sees roses blooming
And violets.

“Now that his day of toil is through,
I love to think he sits at ease,
With some old volume that he knows
Upon his knees.

“Watching, perhaps, with quiet eyes
The white clouds’ drifting argosy;
Or twilight opening flower-wise
On land and sea.

“He who so loved companionship
I may not think walks quite alone,
Failing some friendly hand to slip
Within his own.

“Those whom he loved aforetime, still,
I doubt not, bear him company;
I think that laughter yet may thrill
Where he may be.

“A thought, a fancy--who may tell?
Yet I who ever pray it so
Feel through my tears that all is well
And this I know.

“That God is gentle to His guest,
And, therefore, may I gladly say,
Feel through my tears ’tis for the best,
On this sad day.”

WILL OF MARGARET HAUGHERY

The first monument erected to a woman in this country was that to the memory of Margaret Haughery.

The monument stands in Margaret Place, not far from Canal Street in the City of New Orleans. The figure is that of a woman sitting in a rustic chair, dressed in a plain skirt and loose sack, with a simple shawl thrown over her shoulders, her arm encircling a child.

Prior to her death and by her last will she gave to charitable institutions of the city of New Orleans about six hundred thousand dollars. She died in 1882.

Her parents were Irish immigrants, who died of yellow fever. When quite young she married an Irishman of her own rank, who also died shortly after the marriage, and a year thereafter she lost her only child. The childless widow became a laundress in the St. Charles Hotel, and afterward entered into the bakery business, in which she was eminently successful. Her whole life was devoted to charities, Catholic, Protestant, and Hebrew alike. She never learned to read or write, and could not distinguish one figure from another. Her will is signed with a mark.

The fund for the monument was obtained by popular subscription.

Her funeral sermon was preached by the Archbishop; the business of the city was stopped, and a thousand orphans representing every asylum occupied seats of honor.

WILL OF JOHN ERICSSON

John Ericsson built the _Monitor_ and other engines of destruction, but the rattle of drays, the crowing of cocks, and the barking of dogs were too much for his nerves. There is in existence a receipt for five dollars paid to one Charles Herbert for the removal of a dog and the agreement not to keep one on his premises for a period of one year. And it is also a part of history that he bought up his neighbors’ chickens to secure the privilege of wringing their necks.

Ericsson died March 8, 1889. His will is dated the 15th day of May, 1878.

On November 7, 1884, he wrote to a friend in Sweden as follows:

“They imagine in Sweden that I now possess a large fortune, not considering what it has cost me to be useful to my fellow-men. They do not know that for twenty years, during which time I have spent a million crowns, I have not worked for money.”

His fortune at the time of his death amounted to about one hundred thousand dollars, and his claims against the United States Government were required to make good the bequests in his will. These were distributed among his office assistants, female dependents, certain friends, Von Rosen, Adlersparre, the widow of his son Hjalmar, and his nephews and nieces.

The instrument is of considerable length, and he describes himself as John Ericsson, Civil Engineer, of the city of New York. In a codicil to his will, he mentions his share of the profits and emoluments that might arise from the manufacture and sale of his patents that might thereafter be granted by the United States for improvements in engines. These engines are described as two motive engines, designated as a solar engine and a sun motor.

“Men of genius,” said Dean Stanley over the grave of Charles Dickens, “are different from what we suppose them to be. They have greater pleasures and greater pains, greater affections and greater temptations than the generality of mankind, and they can never be altogether understood by their fellowmen.” “Genius implies always a certain fanaticism of temperament,” says James Russell Lowell. Mr. William Conant Church, in his life of Ericsson, concludes his work with these words: “Let us, in spite of his own doubts, accept the cheerful faith of his friend Adlersparre, that assigns to him a kindlier sphere beyond, where just appreciation and intelligent sympathy may stimulate him to still higher efforts. So ends the story of John Ericsson, the son of Olaf, the son of Nils, the son of Eric, the son of Magnus Stadig, the miner.”

The _Baltimore_, an American warship, under command of Captain Schley, conveyed the remains of Ericsson to Sweden, flying on her foremast a white, square flag with five blue crosses, indicating that she was on King’s business and must not be halted or interfered with on her journey.

HENRY SWINBURNE

Henry Swinburne was an ecclesiastical lawyer, born at York, England, in 1560, and died in 1623. He was educated at Oxford. He wrote “A briefe Treatise of Testaments and last Willes,” which was first published in London in 1590 and passed through many editions, the last one appearing in three volumes in 1803. The book is a rare one at this time, being one of the earliest written on the subject of wills. It was formerly much consulted and greatly valued.

Swinburne was an entertaining writer; he mentions the case of a monk, who came to a dying gentleman to make his will. The monk asked the gentleman if he would give such a manor and lordship to his monastery; the gentleman answered yea: then if he would give such and such estates to such and such pious uses. The gentleman answered yea, again. The heir at law, observing the covetousness of the monk and that the estate would be taken from him, asked the testator if the monk was not a very knave, and he again answered yea: and this last answer having been reported to the Court, the instrument was adjudged no will.

A FRIEND OF CHARLES DICKENS

By his will, dated May 8th, 1868, Mr. H. F. Chorley, an English critic and author who died in 1872, bequeathed to his friend, Charles Dickens, of Gad’s Hill place, £50 for a ring as a token from one greatly helped by him. An annuity of £200 he gave to Mary, the eldest daughter of Dickens.

A PLACE FOR EVERYTHING

Mr. Justice Dean once remarked in a will case before him: “In what particular or inappropriate place an elderly lady, or, for that matter, a young one, will put articles or writings of value, is hard to even guess.”

POVERTY AND RICHES

Of the poor man, it has been written: “He may make his will upon his nail for anything he has to give.”

* * * * *

Bulwer says, “A will is wealth’s last caprice.”

THE LEGALITY OF A MASS

In England, masses are held to be superstitious and unlawful: in the United States, opinions are divided: in most of the States of the Union, bequests for the purposes of masses are valid; in others, however, they are looked upon as an attempt to create a private trust for the benefit of the deceased, without any one to enforce it, and consequently invalid. It may be said that the decisions holding the latter view are not very numerous.

RELIGIOUS BEQUESTS FORBIDDEN

The State of Mississippi has a statute which absolutely forbids bequests, legacies and devises to religious and ecclesiastical bodies; it reads:

“Every legacy, gift, or bequest, of money or personal property, or of any interest, benefit or use therein, either direct, implied, or otherwise, contained in any last will and testament, or codicil, in favor of any religious or ecclesiastical corporation, sole or aggregate, or any religious or ecclesiastical society, or to any religious denomination or association, either for its own use or benefit, or for the purpose of being given or appropriated to charitable uses, shall be null and void, and the distributees shall take the property as though no such testamentary disposition had been made.”

Under the laws of the State of Ohio, testamentary gifts for benevolent, religious, educational or charitable purposes, as against issue, are void, unless the will be executed at least one year before the decease of the testator.

In the District of Columbia, and in the states of Georgia, Idaho, Maryland, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania and Washington, are also to be found laws restricting gifts for religious or charitable purposes.

IN THE POCKET OF AN OLD DRESS

Some five years ago, a young girl about seventeen years old came to a lawyer in a Western city and asked him if he had drawn her grandmother’s will. She was a kittenish little person, such as one would think lived on cakes and chocolate. When told it had been drawn, she notified the lawyer that her grandmother had just died of apoplexy. He then informed her that her grandmother had called a few days before and taken the will with the avowed intention of cutting her off. The girl left, and the next day was back at the law office with the will, holding it tightly with both hands. She had found it in the pocket of an old dress; it had not been changed, and the young woman receives the revenue on $100,000 during her life. She has since married three times, yet retains much life and romance in her composition. Each yule-tide she sends the lawyer a book; the last one was “Fanchon the Cricket,” which treats of how to rear twins. May she grow old gracefully, bless her!

FROM FATHER TO SON

The late William E. Dodge, of New York, received by will from his grandfather a large sum to be invested and the income to be devoted to the spread of the Gospel and to promote the Redeemer’s Kingdom on earth, and to be transmitted, unimpaired, to his descendants for the same purpose. By his will, Mr. Dodge bequeathed the sum to his eldest son to be by him invested and the income to be sacredly devoted, as indicated in the grandfather’s will, and to be handed down to his descendants for a like purpose. With regard to charitable bequests, Mr. Dodge in his will said: “Acting from a judgment deliberately formed, based upon observation of the inexpediency of testamentary bequests to religious and charitable objects, and believing it better and wiser to give liberally during life to such objects, I make no bequests of that character.”

SPOKE FROM EXPERIENCE

The late Rufus Hatch, of New York, in his will gave this advice to his children: “I do not wish my boys to go to college, but to receive a commercial education. Should any of them, however, wish to become lawyer, doctor or clergyman, then he may go to college. I most strongly warn my children not to use tobacco in any shape, or form: nor to touch, taste or use wine or liquor in any way. I earnestly desire that my children shall not gamble in any way for money, as _their father has had experience sufficient to serve for all posterity_.”

WILL OF EUGENE KELLEY

In the will of the late Eugene Kelley, of New York, is found this beautiful sentiment: “I desire to record in this solemn instrument, the expression of my respect and esteem of my friend, J. D., and the honor in which for many years past I have held him. During our long association, his upright and manly character has ever been the same, and has so endeared him to me, that I could not rest satisfied to part from him without giving utterance to this testimony. His ample fortune would make it idle for me to attest my feeling toward him by a legacy, but I trust he will receive from my wife some personal article of mine which will remain to him a reminder of his friend’s affection.” With reference to charitable bequests, he adds, “I make this expression of preference in favor of Catholic and Hebrew institutions, solely because other denominations are wealthier and better able to care for their poor.”

SAMUEL J. RANDALL DIED POOR

The late Samuel J. Randall, an American political leader, left an estate valued at $789.74, which was not enough to pay the bills of the physicians who attended him in his last illness. Of this amount, $589.74 was due by the government for salary, leaving the total value of his property $200 at the time of his death. This is a remarkable showing for a man who spent thirty years of his life in the most responsible positions in the service of his country.

WILL OF JAMES SMITHSON

The Smithsonian Institution in Washington was founded by James Smithson, an Englishman born in France. He was never in the United States, yet he left his fortune of half a million dollars to found at Washington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, “an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men,” provided a certain nephew died without issue, legitimate or illegitimate. The disposition of the fund was for ten years debated in Congress, but finally the trust was accepted, and a board of regents was appointed. Our Weather Bureau is one of the creations of the Institution.

SAILORS’ SNUG HARBOR

Robert Richard Randall, of New York, was the founder of the “Sailors’ Snug Harbor” for the purpose of maintaining and supporting aged, decrepit and worn-out sailors. The will was attacked by the heirs, but was held valid by the United States Supreme Court.

WHERE TO INVEST

Collis P. Huntington, of New York, directed his executors to invest funds in bonds of the United States, or in bonds, stocks or securities of any state north of the Potomac and Ohio rivers, and east of the Mississippi.

A BIG UNDERTAKING

Amos R. Eno, late of Connecticut, made a bequest to the Chamber of Commerce, of New York, to provide for, and assist, such of its members as might be reduced to poverty, and their widows and children.

THE TERM “MISS NANCY”

The term “Miss Nancy” is applied to a man who is over-fastidious in his dress, or who has effeminate manners. The expression dates back to 1730. There was a celebrated actress known as Mrs. Anna Oldfield, and she was buried in Westminster Abbey: she was familiarly known as “Miss Nancy,” and was noted for her extreme vanity and particularity in dress. Not only did she devote much thought to this during her life, but she was careful to provide for her proper attire after death, and, according to her instructions, she lay in state attired in elegant garments and the rarest of laces. She has had many eulogists; one poet says:

“Engaging Oldfield, who, with grace and ease,
Could join the arts to ruin and to please.”

And the poet, Pope, also credits her with saying to her maid:

“One would not sure be frightful when one’s dead,
And,--Betty,--give this cheek a little red.”

She died in 1730 in London, and left the royalty and half the town in tears.

A PEW FOR A SEALSKIN SACK

A certain lady, dying in New York, was entitled to the use for several years to come of a pew in Grace Church, New York; she bequeathed its use to a female relative living in Johnstown, Pennsylvania; the donee, being unable to use the pew, transferred the right to one who could use it, and received in return a sealskin sack which is reported to have been of great length and beauty, thus showing like John Gilpin’s wife that, though on comfort bent, “she had a frugal mind.”

FOUND IN A NOTE-BOOK

Not known until recently to be in existence, because it was written faintly in pencil in an old pocket memorandum book, the will of Dr. John D. Potter, of Pittsburgh, who died July 22, 1906, was recently filed for probate by his brother, Robert J. Potter.

The will disposes of $5000 personal property and real estate of unestimated value situated in Pittsburgh and East Deer township.

It reads:

“John D. Potter will, dated January 22, 1903. I bequeath to my mother all my property, both real and personal. I hereby appoint my brother, R. J. Potter, executor of my estate without bond. John D. Potter, M.D.”

WORKING WITH A WILL

“All lawyers like to take a rest,
Like most of us, and still
The average lawyer’s happiest
When working with a will.”

A CERTAIN PASTOR AND ELDER DEBARRED

There has just been filed at Pottsville, Pennsylvania, the oddest instrument ever recorded in that city: the document conveys land for the erection of a new church, but stipulates that when the church is erected, a certain pastor shall be forever debarred from holding an office or preaching a sermon in the building, and that a specified elder shall also be precluded from holding an office.

ACCURACY IN WRITING

Few realize the value of accuracy in testamentary and other writings. The other day there appeared a decision by the Supreme Court of Missouri, upsetting a sale, where the judges gravely decided that “Mike” did not mean “Michael”; and one of the arguments in reaching this result was, that to have called Michael Angelo, “Mike” Angelo, would have been a sacrilege to the memory of the great painter.

A WILL OF THE FUTURE

If the late prevailing high prices for meat continue, _Puck_ of New York suggests the following will:

“In the name of God, Amen! I, John Doe, in the City of Jersey, County of Hudson, State of New Jersey, being of sound mind and memory, do hereby make, publish, and declare this my Last Will and Testament in manner following, that is to say:

“FIRST, _I bequeath to my eldest son_, JOHN, _two juicy porterhouse steaks now in the custody of the Arctic Storage Company_;

“SECOND, _I leave to my son_, WILFRED, _a leg of spring lamb now stored with the Freezem Warehouse_;

“THIRD, _I leave to my daughter six pounds of veal chops locked in the refrigerator in the cellar beneath my residence, the combination for the lock of which is held by the Columbia Trust Company. It is also my desire that the executors have these chops frenched before turning same over to the legatee_;

“FOURTH, _I leave to my mother-in-law one haslet, which will be delivered to her upon application at either the Morris or Swift beef houses_.

“LASTLY, _I hereby nominate_ RICHARD ROE, _the wholesale butcher_, MORRIS MOE, _the beef-trust magnate, and_ PAUL POE, _meat manipulator, to be executors of this my last will and testament, hereby revoking all former wills by me made_.

“In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal, the eighth day of May in the year of our Lord, Nineteen Hundred and Ten.

“_F. P. Pitzer._”

[Seal]

DOING HIS DUTY

The farmer marched into the little grocer’s shop with a firm step. “I want that tub of butter,” he said, “and that lot of sugar, and all that other stuff.”

“Good gracious!” said the widow who kept the shop. “Whatever do you want with all them goods?”

“I dunno,” said the farmer, scratching his head; “but, you see, I’m the executor of your husband’s will, and the lawyers told me I was to carry out the provisions.”

MAJOR ANDRÉ’S REQUEST OF WASHINGTON

“Tappan, the 1st October, 1780.

“Sir.

“Buoy’d above the Terror of Death by the Consciousness of a Life devoted to honorable pursuits and stained with no Action that can give me Remorse, I trust the request I make to your Excellency at this serious period and which is to soften my last moments will not be rejected.

“Sympathy towards a Soldier will surely induce Your Excellency and a military Tribunal to adapt the mode of my death to the feelings of a Man of honour.

“Let me hope Sir, that if aught in my character impresses you with Esteem towards me, if aught in my misfortunes marks me as the victim of policy and not of resentment, I shall experience the operation of these Feelings in your Breast by being informed that I am not to die on a Gibbet.

“I have the honour to be

“Your Excellency’s
“Most obedient and
“most humble Servant
“JOHN ANDRÉ
“Ad. Gen. to the Brit: :Army.

“His Excellency
“General Washington
“&ca. &ca. &ca.”

PRESIDENT MCKINLEY’S LAST PRAYER

The last words of great men seem always to possess a peculiar value in the minds of the people; the following is a touching example:

In the afternoon of his last day on earth the President began to realize that his life was slipping away, and that the efforts of science could not save him. He asked Dr. Rixey to bring the surgeons in. One by one the surgeons entered and approached the bedside. When they gathered about him, the President opened his eyes and said:

“It is useless, gentlemen; I think we ought to have prayer.”

The dying man crossed his hands on his breast and half closed his eyes. There was a beautiful smile on his countenance. The surgeons bowed their heads. Tears streamed from the eyes of the white-clad nurses on either side of the bed. The yellow radiance of the sun shone softly in the room.

“Our Father which art in Heaven,” said the President in a clear, steady voice.

The lips of the surgeons moved.

“Hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done--”

The sobbing of a nurse disturbed the still air. The President opened his eyes and closed them again.

“Thy will be done in earth as it is in Heaven.”

A long sigh. The sands of life were running swiftly. The sunlight died out; the raindrops dashed against the windows.

“Give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors: and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.”

Another silence. The surgeons looked at the dying face and the friendly lips.

“For Thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, forever, Amen.”

“Amen,” whispered the surgeons.

LAST WORDS OF COUNT LEO TOLSTOI

It was disclosed to the observant eye of Washington Irving that when the noble elk finds himself mortally wounded, he leaves his companions, and turning aside, seeks some out-of-the-way place to die; and his incomparable pen depicts such a scene in his “Tour of the Prairies,” a book which is ever a delight to lovers of nature and outdoor life; and so when death was about to overtake him did Tolstoi, one of the Masters of the Old World, attempt to withdraw from mankind and quietly disappear, dying at a little railway station in Russia.

His valuable manuscripts passed by his last will to his daughter: by another testament, written at the Optina Monastery on November 11, 1910, a few days before his death, he left an address entitled “Effective Means.” It says:

“I am naturally anxious to do all I can against evil, which tortures the best spirits of our time.

“I think the present effective war against capital punishment does not need forcing; there is no need for an expression of indignation against its immorality, cruelty and absurdity; every sincere, thinking person, everybody knowing from youth the sixth commandment, needs no explanation of its absurdity and immorality; there is no need for descriptions of the horrors of executions, as they only affect hangmen, so men will more unwillingly become executioners and governments will be obliged to compensate them more dearly for their services.

_Knowledge Banishes Delusions_

“Therefore, I think that neither the expression of indignation against the murder of our fellow-men, nor the suggestion of its horrors, is mainly needed; but something totally different.

“As Kant well says, there are delusions which cannot be disproved, and we must communicate to the deluded mind knowledge which will enlighten, and then the delusions will vanish by themselves.

“What knowledge need we communicate to the deluded human mind regarding the indispensableness, usefulness or justice of capital punishment in order that said delusion may destroy itself.

“Such knowledge in my opinion is this: The knowledge of what is man, what his surrounding world, what his destiny; hence, what man can and must do, and principally what he cannot and must not do.

“Therefore, we should oppose capital punishment by inculcating this knowledge to all men, especially to hangmen’s managers and sympathizers who wrongfully think they are maintaining their position, thanks only to capital punishment.

“I know this is not an easy task. The employers and approvers of hangmen, with the instinct of self-preservation, feel that this knowledge will make impossible the maintenance of the position which they occupy; hence not only will they themselves not adopt it, but by all means in their power, by violence, deceit, lies and cruelty, they will try to hide from the people this knowledge, distorting it and exposing its disseminators to all kinds of privations and suffering.

“Therefore, if we readily wish to destroy the delusion of capital punishment, and if we possess the knowledge which destroys this delusion, let us, in spite of all menaces, deprivations and sufferings, teach the people this knowledge, because it is solely the effective means in the fight.

“LEO TOLSTOI.

“Optina Monastery, November 11, 1910.”

“REMEMBER CRITTENDEN”

If not a will, the last writing of William Logan Crittenden carried with it a wealth of sentiment and affection; he was a member of the celebrated Kentucky family, and a graduate of West Point. In the year 1851, he joined General Narcisso Lopez, who sought volunteers in the United States to aid in the struggle then going on for Cuban independence. The expedition had intended to land at some remote part of the island of Cuba, but a heavy gale drove the vessel to a small port barely twenty miles from the city of Havana. Crittenden and his party were captured: cruelly bound, he was taken to Havana and imprisoned in the grim Atares Castle; on the following day, he and his companions were shot. Shortly before his death, he was permitted to pen the following pathetic lines to a friend: “This is an incoherent letter, but the circumstances must excuse it. My hands are swollen to double their natural thickness, resulting from having been too tightly corded during the last eighteen hours. Write John (his brother), and let him write to my mother. I am afraid that the news will break her heart. My heart beats warmly for her now. Farewell. My love to all my friends.” When one of the Kentucky regiments was in action during the Spanish-American War, their battle-cry was, “Remember Crittenden.” At Santiago, Cuba, there is placed a commemorative tablet, which serves to recall another ill-fated attempt to aid in a Cuban insurrection, that of 1873. The _Virginius_, a steamer carrying the American flag, was captured by a Spanish man-of-war, the officers, crew and passengers were shot: the tablet reads: “Thou who passest this place, uncover thyself. This spot is consecrated earth. For thirty years it has been blessed with the blood of patriots immolated by tyranny.”

CONFUCIUS

History does not record that the great Chinese philosopher and sage made a testamentary disposition of his worldly effects; but we find that just before his death in 478 B.C., with his hands behind his back, dragging his staff, he moved about his door reciting:

“The great mountain must crumble,
The strong beam must break,
The wise man must wither away like a plant.”

The grave of Confucius is in Kung Cemetery near the city of Kiuh-Fow: a magnificent gate opens into a beautiful avenue which leads to his tomb, this avenue being shaded by cypresses and other fine old trees: the inscription on his tomb reads:

“The most sagely ancient Teacher,
The all-accomplished, all-informed King.”

The great temple erected here in his honor is a splendid edifice.

Confucius enunciated the Golden Rule five hundred years before Christ, and although negatively put, it is to all intents and purposes the same as given by the Master:

“What ye would not, that others should do unto you, do ye not unto them.”

UNDERTAKER PAID IN ADVANCE

The will of Elijah Bell was probated at Columbus, Ohio, on October 5, 1910. It disposes of an estate of twenty thousand dollars between his widow, children and grandchildren. In a codicil, he states that no changes have been made in his will, and that if any were found on opening that document, the court was to declare the instrument a forgery.

He also declared that he had paid the undertaker for his burial, the sum of one hundred and ninety-eight dollars; the items being, a casket one hundred and forty dollars, a vault fifty dollars, and a shroud eight dollars.

SINGS AT HIS OWN FUNERAL

William Faxon died recently at Ovid, Michigan. When the mourners had gathered at the Faxon home, in which lay his open coffin, they were surprised to hear his voice in an anthem from behind a screen of flowers and palms.

Sometime before his death, Faxon conceived the idea of preserving his own voice by means of the phonograph, to be a part of the service when he died. He was a well-known choir singer, and possessed a rich tenor voice.

HEAVENLY SECURITIES

An inventory recently filed in the County Court at Nashville, Tennessee, is probably the most unusual instrument of its kind ever admitted to probate. The document is signed by Mrs. Corra W. Harris, the author of a book of high merit, “A Circuit Rider’s Wife”; her husband, the Reverend Lundy H. Harris, is reported to have died by his own hand; he is said to have been the real circuit rider of the story; his wife qualified as his administratrix. The inventory given below is embodied in a letter addressed to the Clerk of the County Court, which had jurisdiction of the estate of the deceased minister; it is a pathetic and touching tribute from an able pen.

“MR. W. F. HUNT, City.

“DEAR SIR:

“I have your card saying that if I do not furnish you an Inventory of the estate of Lundy H. Harris, of which I was appointed administratrix, within ten days from receipt of this notice, you will proceed as the law directs.

“I did not know it was my duty to furnish such an inventory and now you demand it I do not know how to do it. If the one I send you is not in proper form to be recorded upon your books, I enclose postage and request you to let me know wherein I have failed.