will Cases. AUCKLAND, June 16.

Otago Witness, Issue 2675, 21 June 1905, Page 88

will Cases. AUCKLAND, June 16.

1 At the Supreme Court to-day three ' executors of the will of the late Mr Wm. Adams were allowed 5 per cent, comrnis- | Bion - on the realisation of his estate, which ] was valued at £60,000. It was bequeathed to four children and their offspring till "the latter reached 21 years; it was then to revert to the Established High Church of Paisley in Scotland for charitable purJ poses. The executors are Jessie Prime and j Jane Potter (two daughters) and Mary i Fulton. '■ Mr Justice Edwards gave judgment in the will ease in which Annie Harrow, widow of I the late Edwin Harrow, sought to obtain j a greater measure of support from her late ! husband's estate than was provided in the j will. His Honor said ho thought the sum ■ of £100 per annum was the least which the * testator ought to have allowed to his wife i during her life, and that to that extent he ought to have made provision for her when he d.i«d. The present value of the widow's life interest under a settlement which had been previously made by the testator was ' less than £25 per annum. This must be , j made up to such sum as would ensure her ' I receiving at least £100 per annum. The 1 order of the court tv-as that there be paid ' to plaintiff during her lifetime, out of the estate of testator, the sum of £1 10» per • week, as from th© date of his death, the 1 estate, capital, and intei-est to stand charged with the payment of this annuity. i In the Supreme Court Mr Justice Edwards gave judgment in the will action of Denby v. Denby and others. The case was one in which John Grout Denby sought to obtain probate of the will of his dead ' father (John Grout Denby, of Northcote). of which he was sole executor. The action was contested by Samuel Smith Forsaith Denby and others. His Honor stated that i the will was made out in the testator's handwriting-, and attested by the apparently genuine signatures of two witnesses, who could not now be found ; but the authorities were, he thought, conclusive to show i that, in the state of the facts which existed, he ought to assume the will to have been duly executed. "In the particular case," his Honor continued, " I should have been able to rome to a contrary conclusion. The will is in some respects at least an unjust will. It appears that one of the testator's sons had died in July, 1902, leaving a widow and a number of infant children in destitute circumstances. The burden of the maintenance of these children by law fell upon the testator, who excused himself from making any payment on the ground that he had no ready money, but stated that he would sec what he could do, and that if he could do no better he would provide for them by his will to the extent of the proportion of his deceased son in the estate. Having evaded his duty in his lifetime, the testator had broken his promise to- the charitable persons who acted upon it, and who might otherwise have caused some steps to be taken to make the testator contribute in his lifetime, and has left his grandchildren unprovided for at his death. The person who takes the bulk of the testator's property under the will is a son, who oortainly ought to make good his father's default in this resnect. Hie Honor expressed a hope that the Legislature -would amend " The Testators Family Mainten- ( anoe Aoi. 1900," to make ifc extend to ! grandchildren in future. Reluctantly h« 1 felt bound to hold that the will had "bceu ] proved, and that probate must issue. Costs to be taxed and paid out of the estate. ■■'■■■ i <

Have you got a thorough chill, Goose all over., realy ill; ■ i Wheezing, sneezing, shrill and high", f Furi-y tongue, and watery eyoj i Oblivious to the world's affairs, All its sorrows pleasures, cares, i Useless suffering, why endure? - J •jr-Uco Woods Geeat Pefpeehijt? j^ujie* <