REMARKABLE WILL CASE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIII, Issue 129, 1 June 1907, Page 14

REMARKABLE WILL CASE.

A curious legacy case is before tho Supreme Court in Adelaide, concerning the will ot {he late William Jones., formerly of the E.igle on the Hill Hotel, and a councillor of the Adelaide Corporation, was under consideration in tho Supreme Court lately. The amount of £10,000 or £12,000 is involved. In this sum testator bequeathed a life interest to his children, and directed that the estate should afterwards revert to the South Australian Freothought Society (incorpoiated). That society, however, had not held a meeting for ten years prior to the death of the testator, and advertisements by the Public Trustee in twenty -six widely-circulated Australian new.-.papers had failed to discover the membeis of the society. Under the rules of the society members of it had become non-existent as such by their failure to pay subscriptions. When, however, tho terms of the will became known, a iormer member who was possessed of the society's old rubbeT stamp, which, fortunately, he had not destroyed, put in a claim. His counsel admitted that a defaulting ex-member and ob&olete seal did not constitute '"a bpdy capable of receiving, handling, and administering a legacy," but submitted that under tho doctrine of cy-pres the court would formulate a Scheme analogous to that set out in the objects of the society for administering the legacy. Mr. Justice Gordon asked whether counsel meant that he, sitting as a Judge in a British couTt, should formulate a scheme for the promulgation of freethought doctrines. Mr. Ingleby .replied that it would piobably mean that the court would order the institution of some scheme for free and secular education. Mr. Justice Gordon said that one of the objects of the society was the piomulgation of materialism, and he would decline to formulate any scheme promote that doctrine. Ho was sure that public sentiment Mould resent a Judge doing a thins of that Kind 1 . The Butish law was founclid on the Christian religion, perhaps not now to the extent that it was in timo pact, but (>till to such -<\p extent as to bo opposed to a Judge formulating a scheme of materialism. Mr. Ingleby reinirkcd that two hundred years ago, when British law w.is suppo&ed to bo antagonistic to Roman Catholicism, there Was a case in which the court had found itself obliged to excise tho doctrine of cy-prcn ai rrcpect to the legacy^ and tho fund was given to the Church of Kngl.nul. as an oi!>.misition analogous to the Roman Catholic Church. Mr. Justice Gordon: In that case I may give this fund to a Bible Society. (Laughter.) Mt. Ingleby : I should think your Honour would give it to the Education Department. Mr. Justice Gordon : I should think that the Education Department would decline the legacy if it were offered. While the Stato education hy&iem is frco and secular, it is not materialistic or antiChristi.in. The case "stands pait heard," and the result wil: be awaittd with interest. Mrs. Lawf-on — How wii Mrs. Wykcsleigh afford to keep three K-rvants? *Mis. Dawson — Oh, she plays bridge with them ■ eveiv Monduy ufteiuoou und Mins back I all their wage*, j