TESTAMENTARY AND KINDRED MISCELLANY
“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.
“It is not with the intention of showing an egregious sentimentality
that I say I find it impossible to give you a complete and satisfactory
inventory of the estate of Lundy H. Harris. The part that I give is so
small that it is insignificant and misleading.
“At the time of his death he had $2.35 in his purse, $116.00 in the
Union Bank & Trust Company of this city, about four hundred books, and
the coffin in which he was buried, which cost $85.00.
“The major part of his estate was invested in heavenly securities, the
values of which have been variously declared in this world, and highly
taxed by the various churches, but never realized. He invested every
year not less (usually more) than $1200. in charity, so secretly, so
inoffensively and so honestly that he was never suspected of being a
philanthropist, and never praised for his generosity. He pensioned an
old outcast woman in Barton County, an old soldier in Nashville; he sent
two little negro boys to school and supported for three years a family
of five who could not support themselves. He contributed anonymously to
every charity in Nashville, every old maid interested in a ‘benevolent’
object received his aid, every child he knew exacted and received penny
tolls from his tenderness. He supported the heart of every man who
confided in him with encouragement and affection. He literally did
forgive his enemies and suffered martyrdom on Sept. 18th, 1910, after
enduring three years of persecution without complaint. He considered
himself one of the Chief of Survivors and was ever recognized as one of
the largest bondholders in Heaven.
“You can see how large this estate was and how difficult it would be to
compute its value so as to furnish you the inventory you require for
record on your books. I have given you faithfully such items as have
come within my knowledge.
“Sincerely yours,
“CORRA W. HARRIS, Admx.”
AN UNUSUAL CONDITION
On April 15, 1910, there was an announcement in the newspapers of how a
wealthy and well-known lady in St. Louis died, leaving her entire
fortune to her husband; the remainder to their children; but in the
event he remarries, the estate to pass immediately to their children.
This is the second instance we have known of such a provision in a will.
A learned legal writer of San Francisco states in his work on wills that
he had never met with such an instance.
WILL OF EARL OF PEMBROKE
The will of William, Earl of Pembroke, written July 27, 1469, among
other clauses, says: “ ... And wyfe ye remember your promise to me to
take the ordre of wydowhood as ye may be the better mastre of your owne
to performe my wylle....” And in a codicil he adds: “ ... I will that
Maud my daughter be wedded to the Lord Henry of Richmond; Ann to Lord
Powys; and Jane to Edmund Malafaul.”
TO PAY NATIONAL DEBTS
In the year 1784 there was probated in England, the last will and
testament of one, M. Fortune Ricard, a teacher of arithmetic. It seems
that in his eighth year, his grandparent had given him a small sum of
money, and directed him to add the interest to the principal each year,
and at his death to employ the result in good works for the repose of
their souls. The testator was in his seventy-first year at the time of
his death. He divided the fund into five parts. At the end of one
hundred years, one part was to be given for the best theological
dissertation proving the lawfulness of putting money out at interest. At
the end of two hundred years, the second part was to be expended for
prizes for distinguished, virtuous actions, literature and other
purposes. At the end of three hundred years, the third part was to be
used in establishing five hundred patriotic banks in France, lending
money without interest. At the end of four hundred years, the fourth
part was to be expended in the building of a hundred towns to
accommodate the people of France. At the end of five hundred years, the
fifth part was to be used in paying off the national debts of England
and France.
The will concludes with a hope for the success of these enterprises,
above all, that his example would enkindle the emulation of patriots,
princes and public bodies, and cause them to give attention to this new
and most powerful and invaluable means of serving posterity.
THE NOBEL PRIZES
Alfred Bernard Nobel, a Swedish inventor and philanthropist, was born at
Stockholm in 1833, and died in 1896. He was a student of the
distinguished John Ericsson: he was educated in St. Petersburg, and
studied mechanical engineering in the United States: he was granted
patents by the United States on nitroglycerin and dynamite: his patents
were very numerous, there being filed in Great Britain one hundred and
twenty-nine. In 1875, he controlled fifteen dynamite factories in
different parts of the world. He is best known by his will in which he
founded the Nobel Prize Fund of $9,200,000, reduced by taxation to
$8,400,000, the interest on which is annually divided into five equal
parts, and awarded as prizes to the person who shall have made, (1) the
most important invention or discovery in the domain of physics, (2) in
chemistry, (3) in physiology or medicine, (4) who shall have produced in
the field of literature the most distinguished work of an idealistic
tendency, and, (5) who shall have most or best promoted the interest of
universal peace.
The first four prizes are awarded by the academies of Sweden, and the
fifth by the Norwegian Storthing (Parliament). The value of each prize
is about $38,000; the right to make nominations is bestowed upon members
of corresponding academies of other countries, professors holding proper
chairs in Scandinavian and foreign universities, recipients of Nobel
prizes, and other persons of distinction. The plan of award is that the
prizes shall go to those persons who shall have contributed most
materially to benefit mankind during the year immediately preceding. The
stipulation that the award should be for achievements of the preceding
year has been, to a large extent, disregarded, and in many instances the
award is the result of the life work of the recipient.
SPITEFUL WILLS
Mr. Russell, in his work, “Seeing and Hearing,” says: “Wills which, by
rehearsing and revoking previous bequests, mortify the survivors when
the testator is no longer in a position to do so _viva voce_, form a
very curious branch of the subject. Lord Kew was a very wealthy peer of
strict principles and peculiarly acrid temper, and, having no wife or
children to annoy, he ‘took it out,’ as the saying is, on his brothers,
nephews, and other expectant kinsfolk. One gem from his collection I
recall, in some such words as these: ‘By a previous will I had left
fifty thousand pounds to my brother John; but, as he has sent his son to
Oxford instead of Cambridge, contrary to my expressed wish, I reduce the
legacy to five hundred pounds.’ May the earth lie light on that
benevolent old despot!”
A JILTED LOVER’S WILL
Dr. Forbes (Benignus) Winslow, though of New England stock, was born in
London. He studied medicine in New York and afterward at the Royal
College of Surgeons. He made a specialty of the treatment of insanity
after locating in London, and became noted as an alienist and was at one
time President of the Medical Society of London. He reports the
following very singular will:
“A certain individual, who having been crossed in love, concluded to end
an unhappy and disappointing life, ordered his body to be boiled down,
and all the fat to be extracted therefrom to be used in making a candle,
which was to be presented to the object of his affections, together with
a letter containing his adieus and expressions of undying love. The time
chosen for the delivery of the candle and the letter was at night, in
order that the lady might read the touching lines by this veritable
‘Corpse Candle.’” The will, the learned Dr. Winslow tells us, was
literally carried out.
WILL OF FREDERIC GEBHARD
Frederic Gebhard, once the favorite of the stage and of society, with an
income of $100,000 a year, a private car, and blooded horses and dogs,
left an estate valued at less than $10,000. His will, making no mention
of his widow, was filed September 21st, 1910, in the Surrogate’s office
of New York.
Gebhard died at Garden City on September 8th last. His will provides
that his entire estate shall be given to his sister, Mrs. Mary Isabel
Neilson, who is the mother-in-law of Reginald Vanderbilt.
The will is dated June 21, 1905, some time prior to his marriage to his
last wife, formerly Marie Wilson, one of the original Florodora Sextette
girls. They were wedded early in 1906, but were reported to have
separated. Mrs. Gebhard returned to him some time before he died.
Gebhard attracted public attention over twenty years ago as an admirer
of Lily Langtry, who came to this country as a stage beauty. Gebhard
accompanied her about the country, and purchased a ranch adjoining her
ranch in California. Later she returned to England to become Mrs. Hugo
de Bathe, and Gebhard wedded Lulu Morris. She divorced him, and became
Mrs. Henry Clews, Jr.
IN COLONIAL DAYS
The will of William Farrar of colonial times, related to many St.
Louisans, was probated in 1677 in Henrico County, Virginia. This
document and the inventory portray the customs of those days. There
passed under this will, “one Indian boy named Will, and another named
Jack”; there is a recital that the “Hoggs being out and uncertain, and
one young mare, are left undivided.” The valuations are in tobacco, the
Indian boys being worth 2800 pounds each. This is rather a novel
association of the Indian with tobacco.
FIVE DRAWERS TO BE OPENED
A few years ago, there died a wealthy English gentleman who directed
that the five drawers in his desk be opened on the five consecutive
anniversaries of his death. That was all; not a word about the
disposition of his large fortune. When the fourth drawer was reached, a
sealed letter contained this message: “Have faith and hope, and you will
attain unto the fruition of all your desires.” When on the fifth
anniversary the last drawer was opened, a properly executed will was
found, leaving the property to those who had expected it.
ANTICIPATING MARRIAGE
There is a strong tendency on the part of men to draw up their wills in
favor of the ladies to whom they are affianced. By thus anticipating
what they would probably do after marriage, they not only take duty by
the forelock, so to speak, but reap a present reward in the increased
ardor of the adored ones.
DIFFICULT TASK FOR THE JUDGE
The will of Mrs. Sophia Striewe, of St. Louis, was filed in the Probate
Court in November, 1910. Six-fourteenths of the residuary part of her
estate, amounting to seven thousand dollars, it was directed should go
the one who did the most for her during her last days. The Probate Judge
will probably decline to pass on so delicate a matter.
DENTAL SAFEGUARDS
Quite recently, a Boston philanthropist provided a fund by means of
which the school children of that city were insured the proper care of
their teeth. Dental statistics show that this act must be considered as
far more worthy than any gift of a like nature in the field of
philanthropy for many years; it cannot be doubted that the state of the
health depends to a very large degree on the condition of the teeth, and
actual figures show that only one child in thirty-five has sound teeth,
and much of the sickness of the country can be thus accounted for in
this impairment of one of nature’s equipments.
WHAT COMMODORE VANDERBILT SAID
When Commodore Vanderbilt was on his death-bed, he was visited by his
nephew, Samuel Barton. “Sammy,” he said, “I’ve been thinking all day
about Alexander Stewart’s will. I can’t explain it. I can’t understand
how the greatest merchant in this country, who began with nothing and
made a fortune of millions, who was always clear-headed in business
matters--how was it possible for a man of that kind to make such an
utter damn fool of himself when he came to write his will?”
“ONE CLOVER BLOSSOM”
A poetic nature and a love for clover blossoms are at once shown by a
Michigan testator who devised land to his native village for park
purposes; the only rental being “one clover blossom per annum,” which is
to be picked on the premises and delivered to his heirs or descendants.
No provision seems to have been made for substitute rental in the event
of a failure of the clover crop.
“ONE RED ROSE IN THE MONTH OF JUNE”
Baron Heinrich Wilhelm Stiegel was born in Germany near Manheim, Baden,
of a noble and wealthy family, in 1730. Before he was twenty years of
age, he ventured into the New World with a fortune of $200,000: he
located in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, after having built a home in
Philadelphia. He was a man of great note, establishing iron and glass
works and other industries, and built an elegant mansion at Manheim, in
Lancaster County; the old Lutheran Church in Manheim, built in 1770, was
located on ground now occupied by a modern church of the same
denomination, built in 1891. Stiegel, by will or an instrument of
kindred nature, gave the lot on which the church stands, for a
consideration of five shillings and “the annual rental of one red rose
in the month of June forever.” The payment of the rose occurs on the
first Sunday in June, and is an annual ceremony of great interest; the
church officers bear the rose to the altar on a costly tray, and a
descendant of the testator comes forward at the request of the minister
to receive it. An extended account of Stiegel appears in the proceedings
of the Lancaster County Historical Association for September 4th, 1896.
DESIRED BURIAL ON MOUNTAINS
Robert Louis Stevenson, in his directions for his burial, selected the
apex of a mountain in the Samoan Islands; it was necessary to employ a
great many natives to clear the way to the mountain top. There, in the
midst of singing birds, the blooming of flowers, and the tonic of the
sea breeze, one may read his epitaph, written by himself, but for
another:
“Under the wide and starry sky,
Dig my grave and let me lie.
Glad did I live and gladly die,
And I laid me down with a will.
“This be the verse you grave for me,
Here he lies where he longed to be,
Home is the sailor, home from the sea,
And the hunter home from the hill.”
* * * * *
Cecil John Rhodes admired the grandeur of the Matoppo Hills in Rhodesia,
and directed in his will that he be buried there in a square to be cut
out of the rock on the top of a hill at a point which commanded a
magnificent view of the surrounding country.
* * * * *
Helen Hunt Jackson, the authoress, was buried at her direction, on
Cheyenne Mountain, near the top of Seven Falls, a short distance from
Colorado Springs, Colorado; she desired this for her last resting place,
on account of her love for the surroundings, which are of rare beauty,
and which no doubt gave her inspiration for her literary productions.
* * * * *
Thomas Jefferson, his wife and two daughters are buried near the crest
of Monticello, “Little Mountain.”
Monticello, the home of Jefferson, is beautifully situated, and commands
a view of the town of Charlottesville, the University of Virginia, and
the neighboring country. It has long been known as one of the most
picturesque spots in the South. For many years, a monument bearing the
following inscription from his own pen marked Jefferson’s grave:
HERE WAS BURIED
THOMAS JEFFERSON
AUTHOR
OF THE DECLARATION OF
AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE
OF
THE STATUTE OF VIRGINIA
FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM, AND
FATHER OF THE UNIVERSITY
OF VIRGINIA
BORN APRIL 2D
1743 O.S.
DIED [JULY 4]
[1826]
The old monument was removed about fifteen years ago, and now stands on
the campus of the University of Missouri, at Columbia, Missouri, and a
more imposing one was erected in its place.
NO TRIPS TO EUROPE
Mr. Jefferson G. James, an old and prominent citizen of San Francisco,
died in May, 1910; he was a pioneer cattle dealer and politician; he
left a large estate to be disposed of under his will, which was written
with his own hand and is an eccentric document. One provision in the
nature of advice to the distributees reads as follows:
“Don’t be mean. Don’t pay my employes more than is being paid them now.
No outside speculations. No expensive trips to Europe. Spend your money
in this country. Buy or build nice residences and live and enjoy
yourselves among people you know. The dividends to the small
stockholders will assist in the support of a family.”
In a codicil, he recurs to the subject of European travel, which seems
to have been a pet aversion; he again says, “No trips to Europe.”
RIGHTS OF AN UXORICIDE DENIED
An appeal from a decision of Vice-Chancellor Malins, of London,
questioning the rights of M. de Tourville to inherit under his wife’s
will, was decided against him.
M. de Tourville was found guilty of murdering his wife by flinging her
down a precipice while travelling with her near Botzen, Austria, in
July, 1876. The marriage took place in November, 1875, and the lady was
a widow possessed of large property. The day after the marriage she made
a will, leaving her property to trustees for the benefit of her
children, should there be any, but in default of such, she gave the
whole to her husband, the husband being cognizant of this arrangement,
and thereby, as alleged by the wife’s relations, instigated to commit
the crime of which he was subsequently convicted and sentenced to death
by the Austrian courts. Having appealed, however, his sentence was
commuted to imprisonment for eighteen years.
Under these circumstances, the wife’s relations claimed a declaration
that De Tourville was incapable of taking any interest under his wife’s
will, and argued that the property belonged to Madame de Tourville’s
next of kin.
The Vice-Chancellor refused the application for a commission, on the
ground that the question of law should first be determined whether, in
his position, De Tourville should lose the benefits conferred on him by
the will, and directed an amendment of the pleadings for that purpose.
The case was further complicated by the fact that, previous to his
conviction, De Tourville had (not perhaps so cleverly as he thought)
assigned his interest under the will to another person.
The Master of the Rolls and Lords Justices James and Bramwell, however,
reversed the decision of the Vice-Chancellor, and granted the
application for a commission, the Master of the Rolls remarking that he
was at a loss to understand why the application should have been
refused.
HE ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS
About the year 1875, “Scotch” John Wilson, a native of Scotland, then
living near Tecumseh, Nebraska, drove from his home his son, John
Wilson, and told him never to darken the doors again. The son had
graduated from an Iowa law school and wanted to practise law; the father
wanted the son to stay on the farm; they disagreed and this resulted in
the son’s being driven from home. He rode away on a circus train and
never saw his parents again.
A few years ago, the elder Wilson died, leaving an estate valued at
thirty thousand dollars. By his will, he directed that this estate be
turned over to any claimant who might appear and say he was the missing
son, and who could answer thirty questions. These thirty questions dealt
largely with family history, dates, and other matters which were
peculiarly within the knowledge of the son.
The son appeared, after an absence of thirty-five years, and answering
satisfactorily the thirty questions before the Probate Court, was
awarded the estate. After the decision in his favor, he began crying and
remarked, “I would have preferred to have seen my mother rather than to
take this money.”
FROM UNDER THE SEA
On April 15th, 1910, while manœuvering off Kura in Hiroshima Bay,
Submarine No. 6 of the Royal Japanese Navy was sunk: her commander,
Lieutenant Saguma, and fourteen men were lost. When the vessel was
raised two days after the catastrophe, a document written by him was
discovered; it is a remarkable instrument and may be regarded as a
testamentary log. This paper, written when the commander was slowly
choking to death from the gases generated as the submarine lay helpless
at the bottom of the sea, is a striking instance of the spirit of silent
sacrifice and immolation found in the Japanese character. It reads as
follows:
“I have no excuse or apology for having sunk His Majesty’s No. 6
submarine by my carelessness, but the crew of the boat bravely and
calmly discharged their duties. We now die for the sake of our
country, but we regret that the future development of submarines
will receive a heavy blow as the result of this disaster. It is,
therefore, my hope that you will engage in deeper study of the
submarine without any misapprehension of disasters. If you do this,
we shall feel no regret at our deaths. We were making a gasoline
dive when the submarine sank lower than was intended, and we tried
to close the sluice valve, when the chain unfortunately snapped. I
therefore closed the valve with my own hands, but it was too late
to avert disaster, and the boat sank with a list of 25 degrees. The
boat sank at 10 A.M., and it is now 11.45 A.M. The depth of the
water is about ten fathoms. I always expect death when away from
home. My will is therefore prepared and in the locker, and I hope
Mr. Taguchi will send it with this paper to my father.”
There were numerous other requests, one to the Emperor, an earnest
appeal to supply the means of livelihood to the poor families of the
crew.
WRITTEN BY ENTOMBED MINERS
In November, 1909, over three hundred miners were entombed for a period
of ten days in a mine at Cherry, near Spring Valley, Illinois. The
living were imprisoned with the dead. At the end of ten days, twenty-two
miners were rescued; those saved had kept themselves free from fatal gas
by building a barricade. Saved from death by suffocation, they were
threatened with death by thirst. Two of these men, self-constituted
leaders, gave orders for the protection of the community; they conducted
religious services and cared for the sick and exhausted, and their
directions were strictly carried out.
Two of the miners wrote wills while so imprisoned; they are pathetic
documents. The writer of the following will, Joe Pegati, was rescued:
“This is the 4th day that we have been down here. That’s what I
think, but our watches stopped. I am writing this in the dark
because we have been eating the wax from our safety lamps. I also
have eaten a plug of tobacco, some bark and some of my shoe. I
could only chew it. I hope you can read this. I am not afraid to
die. O Holy Virgin, have mercy on me.
“I think my time has come. You know what my property is. We worked
for it together and it is all yours. This is my will, and you must
keep it. You have been a good wife. May the Holy Virgin guard you.
I hope this reaches you some time, and you can read it. It has been
very quiet down here and I wonder what has become of our comrades.
“Good-by until heaven shall bring us together.
“Joe Pegati.”
The writer of the second will, Samuel D. Howard, aged twenty-one, died
in the mine; his will in part is in these words:
“Alive at 10.30 o’clock yet. Sam D. Howard and Brother Alfred is
with me yet. A good many dead mules and men. I tried to save some,
but came almost losing myself. If I am dead give my diamond ring to
Mamie Robinson. The ring is coming to the Post Office. Henry can
have the ring I have in my good clothes. The only thing I regret is
that my brother could not help mother after I am dead and gone.
* * * * *
“To keep me from thinking I thought I would write these few lines.
There is rock falling all over. We have our buckets full of water,
seep water, and we drink it and bathe our heads in it.
* * * * *
“Seven fifty o’clock in the morning. This is Sunday. There is no
air. We have fanned ourselves with the lids of our buckets. Twenty
five after 9 and black damp coming both ways. Twenty five after 10
we gave up all hope. We have done all we could. The fan had better
start above soon. Twenty five after 10 A.M. Sunday. We are still
alive, the only hope is the fan.
“I think I won’t have strength to write pretty soon. Fifteen after
12 o’clock Sunday. If they can’t give us air, we will make fans
ourselves. We take turns at the fan. We have three of them going.
Twenty seven to 3 P.M. and the black damp is coming in on us.
“Only for the fans we would be dead. Eleven to 4 P.M. dying for want of
air. We have six fans moving. One after another fifteen feet apart. We
all had to come back. We can’t move front or backward. We can stand it
with our fans until Monday morning.
“Fifteen after 2 A.M. Monday. Am still alive. We are cold, hungry, weak,
sick and everything else. Alfred Howard is still alive. 9.15 A.M.
“Monday morning, still breathing. Something better must turn up or we
will soon be gone. Eleven fifteen A.M. still alive at this time. Sixteen
to 1 P.M. Monday, we are still getting weak, Alfred Howard as well as
the rest of us.”
THE TOWN CRIER
Doctor Roland Williams was an author of considerable distinction; he
was, at one time, professor in the College of St. David’s, Lampeter,
South Wales, but had difficulty with the faculty of that institution. He
exiled himself to a neighboring town, where he died, leaving in his will
fifty pounds to the town of Lampeter, one-third of the income of which
is perpetually to be given to the town crier, “for making proclamation
once a year, about midsummer, on a market day, that he, Roland Williams,
never consented to the election of George Lewellin to a scholarship in
this college, but in this and other things he was foully slandered by
men in high places; because he loved righteousness and hated iniquity;
therefore, he died in exile; but while unjust men permitted this, he
both kept the needy student by his right, and defended the alms of the
altar of God.”
CURLL’S COLLECTION OF WILLS
A very curious and now rare collection of wills was made about 1720, by
Edmund Curll, who, according to Pope and Swift, possessed himself
surreptitiously of these as well as of many anecdotes of the private
lives of some of his contemporary celebrities, and published them
anonymously, garbling and altering in a scurrilous manner many of the
facts he had obtained, so that Arbuthnot observed to Swift that “Curll
was one of the new terrors of death;” and the author of “The Man of
Taste” wrote:
“Long live old Curll! he ne’er to publish fears,
The verses, speeches, and last wills of Peers.”
Besides the memoirs and will of “Alderman John Barber,” of “Peter Le
Neve, Esq., Norroy King-at-Arms,” and that of “Anthony Collins, Esq.,”
he issued thirty-one pamphlets containing the “Life, Correspondence, and
last Will and Testament” of each of the following worthies. The list of
them is to be found on the last leaf of the said life of Alderman
Barber, and is as follows:
“1. Archbishop Tillotson.
2. Bishop Atterbury (Dean of Ch. Ch.).
3. Bishop Barnes.
4. Bishop Curll.
5. Earl of Halifax.
6. Lord Carpenter.
7. Lord Chancellor Talbot.
8. Lord Chancellor Pengelly.
9. Judge Price.
10. Rev. Mr. George Kelly.
11. Mr. Wright of Newington.
12. Wm. Congreve, Esq.
13. Mr. Addison.
14. Mr. Prior.
15. Mr. Locke (with his letters and memoirs).
16. Matthew Tindall, LL.D.
17. Mr. Nelson.
18. Dr. Radcliffe.
19. Dr. Williams.
20. Dr. South (2 vols., with his posthumous works).
21. Dr. Hickes.
22. Dr. Burnet (of the Charterhouse).
23. Mr. W. Partridge (the Astrologer).
24. Mr. Mahomet (Servant to his late Majesty).
25. Mr. John Guy.
26. Mr. Wills (the Comedian).
27. Elias Ashmore, Esq.
28. Arthur Maynwaring, Esq.
29. Walter Moule, Esq.
30. Wm. King, LL.D.
31. Mr. Manley (Author of the ‘Atlantis’).”
Indeed, Curll seems to have had an itching hand for seizing on
everybody’s will; for, among other of the singular productions he put
before the public, is a satirical work called “Pylades and Corinna:
Memoirs of the Lives, Letters, and Adventures of two Lovers, Richard
Grinnett, Esq., of Great Shurdington in Gloucestershire, and Mrs.
Elizabeth Thomas Jenner of Great Russell Street, Bloomsbury, together
with all the Incidents of their Sixteen Years’ Courtship, and two
complete Copies of their last Wills and Testaments;” and yet more
extraordinary, he invented a will for the Evil One, which he styled:
“Satan turned Moralist; or, The Devil’s last Will and Testament. Price
1_s_.” A copy of this rare book, worthless though it may be as far as it
might afford entertainment to any reader of the present day, would, we
fancy, command a good many shillings now.
Of these, fifteen are still extant, and in the library of the British
Museum, viz.: those numbered, in our list of Curll’s publications,
respectively 2, 4, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 29;
but it is no easy task to find them, even in the Catalogue.
A WEIRD CUSTOM
In one of Balzac’s best novels, “The Country Doctor,” he tells of a
strange custom which prevails in some of the mountainous districts of
France. It will be recalled that the Country Doctor leaves Paris and
takes up his abode in a remote country district, the purpose being to
make amends for a life which at the outset had not been blameless and
had brought about remorse and contrition. He devotes a long and useful
life to the unsophisticated country people among whom he locates.
The custom referred to is that upon the death of a husband the neighbors
surround the bier and at intervals wail, “The master is gone! The master
is gone! The master is gone!” The widow with her own hands cuts off her
hair and places it in the hands of the corpse, as an evidence of
devotion and constancy.
TO THE DEVIL
There is perhaps no sentiment, grateful or spiteful, or any phase of
humor, good or bad, which has not been illustrated in testamentary
documents.
Probably the legatee who stood the least chance of realizing was the
Devil; an attempt was made to make him a land owner in Finland: a few
years ago, a queer old native of that country devised all his property
to the Devil without attempting to establish the identity of the
devisee. The Devil’s claim was disregarded and the property went to the
heirs of the testator. It was suggested by one writer that doubtless the
testator desired to make a good impression on his Satanic Majesty with a
view to conciliating him; another writer suggests that even the name of
the Devil in a will is better than none, such omissions being frequently
found in wills.
DEVISE TO AN IDOL
Within recent years, the Judiciary Committee of the Privy Council of
Great Britain was called upon to pass on the validity of a testamentary
devise made four hundred years prior to that time by a resident of
India, conveying by will certain lands to the use of an idol, and,
strange to say, this gift was sustained.
Mr. Justice Riddell, of the Supreme Court of Canada, recently called
attention to this remarkable devise, in an address before the State Bar
Association of Missouri.
It appears that one of the descendants of the original testator, after
the lapse of four centuries, by a subsequent will, attempted to devise
the same property which was formerly conveyed to the use of the idol.
The Privy Council upheld the original gift, and the lands are still
devoted to the use of the idol.
THE LOST DAUPHIN
It is said the Duchesse d’Angoulême, sister of the “Lost Dauphin,” was a
cold-hearted woman who preferred the prospect of a throne to the calls
of family affection. She died childless and in exile at Prague in 1845.
There is a story that on her deathbed she called to her side General la
Rochejacquelein and whispered:
“General, I have a fact, a very solemn fact, to reveal to you. It is the
testament of a dying woman. My brother is not dead; it has been the
nightmare of my life. Promise me to take the necessary steps to trace
him. France will not be happy nor at peace till he is on the throne of
his fathers.”
The story is probably apocryphal; if true, it is a pity that the dying
duchess left no documentary proof of her belief, even though it involved
the awful confession that it was her selfishness that had cheated her
brother out of a throne and rendered him a nameless outcast.
GEORGE SAND’S CURIOSITY
George Sand married in early life a coarse type of man, Casimir
Dudevant. Their union was not a happy one. It happened that she found a
packet in her husband’s desk, marked, “Not to be opened until after my
death.” She wrote of this in her correspondence:
“I had not the patience to wait till widowhood. No one can be sure of
surviving anybody. I assumed that my husband had died, and I was very
glad to learn what he thought of me while he was alive. Since the
package was addressed to me, it was not dishonorable for me to open it.”
And so she opened it. It proved to be his will, but containing, as a
preamble, his curses on her, expressions of contempt, and all the vulgar
outpouring of an evil temper and angry passion. At once she formed the
great decision of her life.
She went to her husband as he was opening a bottle, and flung the
document upon the table. He cowered at her glance, at her firmness, and
at her cold hatred. He grumbled and argued and entreated; but all that
his wife would say in answer was:
“I must have an allowance. I am going to Paris, and my children are to
remain here at Nohant.”
She went into the Latin Quarter, and not only Paris but the world heard
much of her. She wrote, “The proprieties are the guiding principle of
people without soul or virtue,” and, as is well known, her life was in
accord with this sentiment.
CHARLES DICKENS ON ELDERLY TESTATORS
When Dickens came to America in 1842, he visited the charitable
institutions of Boston, Massachusetts, and of them wrote in his
“American Notes”: “I sincerely believe that the Public Institutions and
Charities of Boston are as nearly perfect, as the most considerate
wisdom, benevolence, and humanity can make them. I never in my life was
more affected by the contemplation of happiness, under circumstances of
privation and bereavements, than in my visits to these establishments.”
In this connection he writes of the creation of such institutions
through wills:
“The maxim that ‘out of evil cometh good,’ is strongly illustrated by
these establishments at home; as the records of the Prerogative Office
in Doctors’ Commons can abundantly prove. Some immensely rich old
gentleman or lady, surrounded by needy relatives, makes, upon a low
average, a will a-week. The old gentleman or lady, never very remarkable
in the best of times for good temper, is full of aches and pains from
head to foot; full of fancies and caprices; full of spleen, distrust,
suspicion, and dislike. To cancel old wills, and invent new ones, is at
last the sole business of such a testator’s existence; and relations and
friends (some of whom have been bred up distinctly to inherit a large
share of the property and have been, from their cradles, especially
disqualified from devoting themselves to any useful pursuit, on that
account) are so often and so unexpectedly and summarily cut off, and
reinstated, and cut off again, that the whole family, down to the
remotest cousin, is kept in a perpetual fever. At length it becomes
plain that the old lady or gentleman has not long to live; and the
plainer this becomes, the more clearly the old lady or gentleman
perceives that everybody is in a conspiracy against their poor old dying
relative; wherefore the old lady or gentleman makes another last
will--positively the last this time--conceals the same in a china
teapot, and expires next day. Then it turns out, that the whole of the
real and personal estate is divided between half-a-dozen charities; and
that the dead and gone testator has in pure spite helped to do a great
deal of good at the cost of an immense amount of evil passion and
misery.”
THE CLOAK AND EARRING OF CHARLES I.
On the morning of January 30th, 1649, Charles I. rose early and for some
time remained in prayer and meditation; he was then taken to Whitehall
for execution, accompanied by his faithful Confessor, William Juxon,
Bishop of London. On the scaffold with him were Colonel Hacker, another
officer, and two men disguised with masks; though heard by few, the King
addressed the vast crowd in the following words: “For the people, truly,
I desire their liberty and freedom as much as any body whosoever, but I
must tell you that their liberty and their freedom consists in having of
government those laws by which their life and their goods may be most
their own. It is not for having share in Government, Sirs; that is
nothing pertaining to them; a subject and a sovereign are clean
different things, and therefore until you do that, I mean that you do
put the people in that liberty as I say, certainly they will never enjoy
themselves.”
He made a last profession of faith and gathered his hair under his cap;
then took off his cloak and George and gave them to Bishop Juxon with
one word, “Remember.” He then took from his left ear a large pearl
earring and formally bequeathed it to one of his faithful followers; it
is still preserved and is now owned by the Duke of Portland. It is
pear-shaped, about five-eighths of an inch long and mounted with a gold
top, and has a hook to pass through the ear. He then laid himself down
on the block, breathed a short prayer, and stretched forth his hands,
the appointed signal for the executioner, who performed his duty well,
for the head of the King was severed by one blow and it was held up to
the view of the crowd, which answered with a fearful groan.
Masculine earrings were formerly quite common: Sir Walter Raleigh wore
one, and so did Horace Walpole, and the Earl of Southampton; Shakespeare
indulged the same taste. In modern times such male finery has been
largely relegated to sailors, gypsies and negroes.
EXHORTATION TO CONDEMNED PRISONERS
Robert Dowe of St. Sepulchre, London, in his lifetime, on the 8th of
May, 1705, gave £50 to the end that the vicar and church-wardens of that
parish should, forever, previously to every execution at Newgate, cause
a bell to be tolled, and certain words to be delivered to the prisoners
ordered for execution, in the form and manner specified in the terms of
his gift, as set forth in the old will book.
An annual sum of £1 6_s._ 8_d._ in respect of this gift was charged upon
the parish estate in West Smithfield; it was paid to the sexton, who
employed a person to go to Newgate on the night previous to every
execution, where he offered to perform the prescribed duty, which was
always declined, as all needful services of that kind were performed
within the prison.
Noorthouck, in his History of London, gives the words of the
exhortation. He states that the sexton “comes at midnight, and after
tolling his bell calls aloud,
‘You prisoners that are within,
Who for wickedness and sin,
after many mercies shewn you, are now appointed to die to-morrow in the
forenoon, give ear and understand, that to-morrow morning the greatest
bell of St. Sepulchre’s shall toll for you in form of and manner of a
passing bell, as is used to be tolled for those that are at the point of
death; to the end that all godly people hearing that bell, and knowing
it is for you going to your deaths, may be stirred up heartily to pray
to God to bestow his grace and mercy upon you whilst you live. I beseech
you for Jesus Christ’s sake to keep this night in watching and prayer,
to the salvation of your own souls, while there is yet time and place
for mercy; as knowing to-morrow you must appear before the judgment seat
of your Creator, there to give an account of things done in this life,
and to suffer eternal torments for your sins committed against Him,
unless upon your hearty and unfeigned repentance you find mercy through
the merits, death, and passion of your only mediator and advocate Jesus
Christ, who now sits at the right hand of God to make intercession for
as many of you as penitently return to him.’
“On the morning of execution, as the condemned criminals pass by St.
Sepulchre’s churchyard to Tyburn, he tolls his bell again and the cart
stopping, he adds, ‘All good people pray heartily unto God for these
poor sinners, who are now going to their death, for whom this great bell
doth toll. You that are condemned to die, repent with lamentable tears;
ask mercy of the Lord for the salvation of your own souls, through the
merits, death, and passion of Jesus Christ, who now sits at the right
hand of God, to make intercession for as many of you as penitently
return unto Him.
‘Lord have mercy upon you!
Christ have mercy upon you!
Lord have mercy upon you!
Christ have mercy upon you!’”
THE PARDONED POET’S FAREWELL
“John Carter,” the convict whose poems brought him pardon, did not leave
his Minnesota prison without a farewell message to his friends within
its walls. This “last will and testament” was first printed in the
weekly _Prison Mirror_, published in the penitentiary. The St. Paul
_Dispatch_ quotes it as follows:
“This is the last will and testament of me, Anglicus. I hereby give and
bequeath my collection of books (amounting to some 6000 volumes) to Mr.
Van D., in memory of the not altogether unpleasant hours we spent
together, hours marked by no shadow of animosity at any time. We could
not be happy, but we were as happy as we could be. To Dr. Van D. I leave
my mantle of originality, and what remains of the _veuve cliquot_, in
memory of encouragement when I most needed it.
“To the editor I leave my space on this journal and the best of good
wishes in memory of his unfailing courtesy and forbearance.
“To Uncle John and to Sinbad go my heartiest wishes that we may meet
soon in some brighter clime.
“To Mr. Helgrams, my best dhudeen and the light of hope.
“To young Steady and to Mr. D. M., my poetic laurels, which they are to
share in equal measure.
“To the boys in the printing-office, the consolation of not being
obliged to set up my excruciating copy.
“To the tailors (and to the boss tailor in particular, ‘Little Italy,’)
my very best pair of pants.
“To Jim of the laundry,--but nothing seems good enough for Jim, the best
soul that ever walked.
“To Portfiro Alexio Gonzolio, a grip of the hand.
“To Davie, pie, pie again, and yet more pie.
“To the band boys--why, here’s to ’em! May they blow loose.
“To my fellow pedagogues, ‘More light,’ as Goethe put it, more
fellowship; it would be impossible to wise them. They know where I stand
and I know where they stand.
“Lawdy! lawdy! If I hadn’t forgotten Otto and his assistant. Here’s all
kinds of luck to ’em, and no mistake about it.
“Finally to all those not included hereinbefore (for various reasons),
here’s to our next merry meeting. To those in authority, thanks for a
square deal. To mine enemy--but I mustn’t bulcon him.
“Gentlemen, I go, but I leave, I hope I leave my reputation behind me.
“ANGLICUS.”
PROBATES HIS OWN WILL
Judge R. B. Tappan, of Alameda, California, in July, 1910, practically
probated his own will. He filed in the Recorder’s Office, of Alameda
County, a document which makes the Alameda Lodge of Elks his
beneficiary. He provides that if he dies or becomes insane his property
is to go to the Elks. Throughout the legal phraseology of the instrument
Judge Tappan has made many unique observations, among which he states
that he trusts that no one will inspect him too closely for signs of
dementia. He says:
“I hope that such things as leading a horse over a hill while I am
hatless and coatless and wearing a bandana handkerchief over my head or
wearing moccasins in the city will not be considered evidence of
insanity sufficient to revoke the terms of this trust.”
On Judge Tappan’s death he directs that such property as he has
transferred to the trust shall immediately be put to the uses of the
Elks lodge after paying his funeral expenses, which, he says, should not
be over $75. He remarks in the document that he has already paid $10 for
a redwood box to convey his remains to the crematory. In regard to the
document, Judge Tappan said:
“I have the consent of the directors of my lodge of Elks to keep for me
in their possession during my life my property now in their possession,
and any property which I may place in their custody hereafter will be
similarly held. I have made provisions in the declaration which will
pass the trust fund to the Elks lodge in the event of my death or in the
event of my becoming insane. The question of insanity is left to the
officers of my lodge. There may arise an occasion where some meddlesome
person or persons would lodge a contest, and perhaps my wishes
concerning the disposition of what belongs to R. B. Tappan would not be
complied with. I have a right to do what I see fit with what is mine
without consulting any one else, and it is a great satisfaction to me
to-day to know just where my property will go in the event of the
happening of either one of the conditions referred to. This proposition
involves a large sum of money and securities which are as good as gold
coin, and the matter is no joke. The officers realize this, or else they
would not have accepted the trust. I never speculate or gamble in any
form; hence my trust is not likely to shrink much.”
TRUST COMPANIES AS EXECUTORS
The Trust Companies of the United States and other countries have, in
recent years, proved themselves the best mediums for administering
wills; such an institution located in Melbourne, Australia, in pointing
out its merits and stability, quite uniquely, we think, quoted
Tennyson’s lines:
“ ... Men may come,
And men may go,
But I go on for ever.”