Where Wills Go Wrong.

Pelorus Guardian and Miners' Advocate., Volume 29, Issue 38, 18 May 1917, Page 2

Where Wills Go Wrong.

WHY LAWYERS LOVE HOMEMADE AND ECCENTRIC WILLS

Strange to remark, lawyers have no objections to people making their own wills ; in fact, they thoroughly approve of the practice. It is true that the man who buys a form of will, and draws it up himself, prevents the lawyer from obtaining a fee, but the lawyer is more than compensated in other ways. Apart from this, a vast number of wills are drawn up for people by unprofessional men, the law permitting this without any interference by the Incorporated Law Society.

Home-made wills are a fruitful source of income for the lawyer, for, as has well been remarked, the man who draws up his own will has a fool for a client. The lay mind is inclined to sneer at the elaborate language the solicitor employs when drawing up a will, considering that this is a mere example of red tape. Unless, however, everything is specified without any possibility of cavilling, there is always the likelihood that trouble will arise in the interpretation of the testator’s desires. Take, for example, the following case, which will form a,neat problem for the ingenious

When Sir John Swale died it was found that his will contained the clause : "I do bequeath unto the said Matthew Stradling all my black and white horses.” At first sight this appears to be very simple, but it was found that Sir John had owned six black horses, six white horses, and six pied horses. The question now arises how the clause should be interpreted.

Accordingly the suit of Stradling v. Stiles was entered into, turning around the point as to whether Stradling was entitled to the pied horses. The plaintiff’s counsel argued as follows -.—Black and white are the extremes of colours, and therefore include all other colours. The plaintiff was entitled to the black horses, as the case was covered by the word “black.” He was entitled to the six white horses, as they were given by the word white. At the same time he was entitled to the six pied horses, as they were given to him by the words “black and white.”

The counsel for the defendant, however, said that the reasoning was absurd, as it would have entitled the plaintiff to all horses of every colour red or bay, for example. He argued that a pied horse was neither black nor white, and therefore the bequest could not have applied to those six horses, as they would not come under the definition “black and white horses.”

It will be seen what a difficult task was left to the Court, but after a considerable amount of deliberation it decided eventually in favour of the plaintiff. Accordingly, judgment was given for Stradling, who apparently had won the day. Immediately, however, there came another difficulty which defied the cleverest men.

It was shown that the animals werej mares, and so the much perplexed court had to have all the business over again. There were more arguments, more cogitations and consultations of authorities, but, alas, without any result. Perhaps the reader may have more success than the lawyers in solving this puzzle, for so far as they arc concerned it ,has not been settled to this day. Another remarkable point arose over the famous will of Peter Thellusson. He was an enormously wealthy man, but decided to leave such a fortune as had never been approached by any other individual in history. He directed that there should be no division of his estate during the lives of his children and grand-children, but that all the profits should be allowed to accumulate, being laid out in landed estates. Such a -will had never been made by any other individual, and it was estimated that even if a division took place in the shortest possible time, the estate would amount to considerably over £27,000,000 sterling, while in 75 years’ time the income would amount ,to a sum approaching £2,000,000 a year. The family contested the validity of the will, the case being carried to the House of Lords, where it was upheld, however, although it was recognised that such a power was dangerous to the State. In fact, a special Act of Parliament was passed, by which it is now impossible for any individual to allow such accumulations in the future, the time now being limited to 25 years. The point of interest in connection with the present article, however, is that which arose on the death of the last grandson. This was whether the accumulated fortune should go to the eldest great-grandson or to the grandson of the eldest son. This case was carried through to the highest court in the land, the final decision being that the latter should inherit. \

An interesting fact is that this fortunate individual did not inherit anything approaching the estimated sum of £27,182,000. The actual sum which reached him was the far more moderate one of £6oo,ooothe lawyers and the Court of Chancery took the balance !