SUPREME COURT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1022, 11 January 1911, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

DISPUTE BETWEEN TRUSTEES. MONEY FOR CHARITIES. Differences of opinion regarding the disposal of the estate ot the late Mrs. Elizabeth Ivnox, a wealthy Auckland lady, led to proceedings beloro Mr. .Justice Aid-wards-m Chambers at the Supremo Court yesterday. The late Mrs. Ivnox, who died in October, 1008, leit *£22,500 to be distributed aniong iier nephews, nieces, and friends, most of whom are'resident in Ireland and America. She also bequeathed X' 41,000 to specific charities and institutions—including ,£20,000 towards the establishment of a home i'or incurables—and leit the residue of her estate to be distributed by her trustees in charity, as they thought fit. Tho trustees, a few weeks after the death of Mrs. Ivnox, decided to augment"" the fund for tho Home for Incurables by adding the whole of the residue of the estate to it, and as this residue proved to be worth some <£20,000, the amount for tho building and endowment of - the home, therefore, stands atabout c£io,ooo..About 12 months ago it was further resolved to hand over the bequest for tho Home for Incurables, together with the balance of the estate for the same' purpose, to the Public Trustee. Tho trustees—Messrs. T. Buddie and Archibald Clements (of Auckland) and Mr. l\ G. Clayton, (-of' Peatherston)— meantime proceeded with the realisation of the estate, and the settlement of the bequests, working., amicably together ior a' time, till V series of disagreements arose. Mr,. Clements, in the petition, which brought the matter before Mr. Justice Edwards, stated that lie has been endeavouring ever since to get the £20,000 for the Home for Incurables handed over to tho Public. Trustee, but without success, while his fellow trustees asserted that it- is Mr. Clements's actions that have prevented them from carrying matters out as intended. Tho consequence has: been that tho £20,000 of the spccial bequest,, together with some £10,000, part of,tho residue, of the estate,, has been lying at. the bank on current account, not prq'Juciiigiinterest. When the case came on yesterday, Mr. M. Myers 'appeared-for. tho petitioner and.Mr. Richmond (of Auckland) for the respondents. Mr.. Myers submitted, that it w<as impossible for tho trustees to act in accord, and if matters were left as they were the trust would suffer. The trust being the first consideration, it was asked that the Court would cxercise its discretion in appointing tho Public Trustee. His Honour: The position is very unrortiinate. Mr. l Myers: The trustees havo been very well paid. They had nearly £1000 each under the will, and Mr. Clayton is not satisfied with'that.

His Honour: How was the amount made up? .. .

Mr. Myers: It was 3 per cent. 011 .£90,000. One-half was paid immediately the witl-was proved, and the balance was paid in instalments.

Mr. lvichmcnd said that it had been alleged that Mr. .Clayton and Mr. dlo had been acting, not for the benefit of the estate, but of the Bank of New Zealand. 1t... was suggested . that tho money was lying in tho bank, without earning intercut, because,the trustees re■tused lo'pay oyer-the. funds to thy Public Trustee. This . was absolutely incorrect. It .was Mr. Clements's fault that the 'money was lying idle. His Honour:. It'is. quite obvious that ft continuance of • the present state of things can only lead to expense and trouble. ■ ' • Mr. Richmond: Not if Mr. Clements had acted, reasonably. We were always willing to hand over 'the money, to the ; Public Trustee, olthpugh.it was not the desire of the testatrix, and, it was not the. fault .of -my clients that it was not :dqne long ago. They think the trust should be administered by the Charitable 'Aid Board, by a private board, or by themselves. Replying to an assertion by Mr. Rich„jiipnd that, tho proceedings were purely vindictive; his Honour remarked: I don't' care two pence what the motive is. Mr. Myers put the case, quite fairly. Ilis Honour added' that Mr. Clayton was unfit to act as .trustee. Ho thought Mr. Buddie made a mistake in.identifying himself with Mr. Claylon. . Finally ■ his Honour said ho, did not think it ought to lie necessary for him to make an order at all in this case, but the position could not remain as it was. It did follow that if'ho thought fit to remove tho present trustees he ■ would. ap-. point the Public Trustee. It was. not a trust that could well be administered by the Public Trustee, ns: local knowledge was necessary. His Honour ordered the trustees to place. the money within , one week on fixed-deposit for six months. He. then adjourned the'application sine die.