INTERPRETATION OF WILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIX, Issue 21130, 12 March 1932, Page 14

INTERPRETATION OF WILL.

A " HOME-MADE " DOCUMENT. INTEREST SOUGHT BY WIDOW. [FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT.! HAMILTON, Friday. Tlio question whether a widow was entitled to benefit from the estate bequeathed by her jiusband was raised in a case involving the interpretation of a will heard before Mr. Justice Smitb in the Supreme Court at Hamilton to-day. The widow, Elizaboth Emma Wallace, sought a beneficial interest in th e estate of Iho late William Wallace, farmer, of Hamilton. The children, Kenneth William. Alan Purvis, Neville Charles and Ethel Margaret Wallace, and Una Magdalene Connell, were cited as defendants but supported the application. Counsel for tho widow said tho case was tho outcome of the folly of drafting a home-made will. The deceased, who was a farmer residing in Hamilton, made his will in 1912 and later altered it to suit certain circumstances, with the result that some ambiguity as to his intentions was left.

Under llic will tho widow was appointed sole executrix, and it was slaled that, oil property was bequeathed to heir, "to bo lirld in trust by her for the benefit of tho children, and that she should have control of the 'estate during her lifetime," continued counsel. It was contended that had the document not concluded with the words "for tho benefit of tho children," I lie meaning would have been quite clear. Mrs. Wallace would have received no beneficial interest, and the estate would have passed automatically to the children. He submitted that the words used implied that tho widow should have some interest. All tho children were of age and the widow had no property or private income. The net. value of the estate was approximately £SOOO. Counsel added that the Stamp Office had made an assessment, of duties based on tho assumption that Mrs. Wallace obtained a life interest in th© estate. Jf lb© Court held that she took no beneficial interest the duties would <bs largely increased. Counsel for defendants explained that the interests of the children were identical and expressed agreement with the interpretation of the will construed by counsel for the widow. He gave an assurance that the children had stated it was their father's intention to provide their mother with a life interest in the estate. His Honor reserved judgment.