CHARITABLE AID.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 12757, 29 September 1919, Page 8

CHARITABLE AID.

A WILL CASE. QUESTION OF INTERPRETATION. By the will of Lillah Fairhurst, a 'widow, who died in December, 1918, the sum of £IOOO was left to the North Canterbury Hospital Board, a legacy of £SOO to ‘ ‘ The Public Benevolent Institution for the old, aged and needy in Christchurch,” the residue, after providing for certain personal bequests, to he divided equally between the North Canterbury Hospital Board and Dr Baraardo’s Homes. His Honor Mr Justice Herdman was called upon in the Supreme Court Today to decide which, institution in Christchurch, if any, was entitled to the legacy of £SOO. as there is no local body known as The Public Benevolent Institution.” The North Canterbury Hospital Board claimed the legacy on the ground that it was the only public institution charged with the care of the aged, infirm and needy and maintained two homes for this purpose—the Queen’s Jubilee Memorial Home at Wcclston and tbe Old Men’s Homo at Ashburton. The Christchurch Benevolent Association, through its secretary, the Rev Frank Rule, claimed , the legacy, on the ground that it was the association referred to in the will of the testatrix. In an affidavit the Rev Frank Rule outlined the objects of the association and the work done by it. affording relief to persons in need of chan table aid. The* only revenue craflabl'y for the carrying on of the association’s work was derived from gratuities made or legacies left to the association. The M’Lcan Institute also bad lodged a claim to the legacy. Owing to the lack of dear definition in the will the executor of the will, Mr J. P. limes, solicitor of Palmerston North, declined to pay over the legacy and instituted proceedings through the solicitors for tlie North Canterbury Hospital Board to obtain a ruling from , the Supreme Court as to what body, if any, was entitled to the legacy. Mr 13. L. Lane appeared for the North Canterbury Hospital Board, Mr : M. J. Cressou ‘for _ the Christchurch Benevolent Association, Sir Dougall for the trustee of the will and Mi Beswick for the M’Lean InstitntcBefors the case for the North Canterbury Hospital Board _ was opened. Mr Dougall raised the point that there might be a lapse owing to the lack of proper representation, inasmuch as the Itarnardo Homes wore not represented, although they were entitled to onehalf the residue of the estate. Counsel submitted that owing to the _ lack of proper description in the will it might be necessary to frame a. ppv.' scheme. His Honor decided to hear the legal argument in the case, noting the points raised by Air Dqugail. Mr Beswick, on behalf of theM'Lean Institute, said it was recognised that the. Institute had no claim to the legacy. A formal claim to the legacy had been lodged, hut counsel had had to advise the Institute that it had no claim whatever to it. The Institute was accordingly granted permission to withdraw from the case. Air Lane said that the question for his Honor to decide was whether there was in existence on December 29, 1918, a body which complied with the terms of the testatrix’s will and was entitled to the gift. Counsel said that in 1885 there was a large number of Hospital Boards administering charitable ad throughout New Zealand. It was thought desirable that public bodies should be created to take over the administration of charitable aid. An' Act was accordingly passed in 1835, in which some thirty-six or thirtythree benevolent institutions were merged in the various hospitals. Among these societies was one named “The Christchurch Benevolent Society.” Uv the Act of 1835 the Hospital Board was Ibkmnd to provide for tlso old, aged and needy who had no moans and were incapable of earning money. The board always had funds for this purpose. The body Mr Gresson represented was not a public body and might not always have funds. Under the Act of ISSS no one was to be permitted to starveHis Honor; Then you would have to provide relief for a person thirty years of age? Mr Lane: Yes, if he is unable to support himself. Anyone in need can be committed to the board’s care by a magistrate. Counsel submitted that the plaintiff board completely satisfied the description of tho body to whom the legacy was left by the will. His Honor asked what were the boundaries of the district over which the Hospital Board operated. Mr Lane said that the district was bounded by the Clarence River on the north and the Rakaia river on the south. His Hqnor: Am I to understand then that the Hospital and Charitable Aid Board is tho only public body administering charitable relief throughout this district? ® Mr Lane; Thao is what is claimed Counsel added that the Old Men’s Home in Ashburton was vested in the North Canterbury Hospital Board and was managed by the Board. Indigene, old and infirm men were sent there from all districts. To His Honor: The board obtained its revenue by means of rates and Government subsidies. Counsel added that the Government did not re-

cognise the association represented by Mr Gresson and did not subsidise ;i. The Christchurch Benevolent Association came into existence in 1909 and was established to prevent the overlappmg of charitable work by the various parishes. The association was maintained by voluntary subscriptions, though it had received two gifts, one of £-50 from Madame Melba and another of £4OOO from the late Airs Townend. Tiie association was under no control—there was no public audit of its funds and it wa.s not recognised by the Government in any way. To his Honor: The association was not under any obligation to provide for the aged and needy. Sir Gresson said the question for his Honor to decide was the intention of the testatrix. He submitted that the governing word in the bequest was the word ‘ : benevolent-” At bis Honor’s request, Mr Gresson described the_ constitution of the association and its aims and objects, contending that it was a public benevolent institution. His Honor said ho was faced with the fact that if there was one publicinstitution in Christchurch it was the -North Canterbury Hospital Board. Mr Gresson pointed out that the board had not been known by the name “ benevolent ” since 1880. The question was, did the testatrix mean the Hospital Board when she made the legacy? There yeas nothing to support this assumption. "When she wanted to leave money to fne Palmerston North Hospital and Charitable Aid Board she used this Term to describe it. Further, there was no need for her to leave the. legacy to the board, rh half the residue of her estate was to go to the board. ‘When she wanted to leave money to the Christchurch Hospital she used the word “hospital.” If the money was to bo paid to the Hospital Board it would clearly have t> be administered on such terms aa w-ould constitute a breach of trust, as the will specifically stated that the money' was to be used to relieve distress in Christchurch, and the board’s district covered the - area from the Clarence River to the Rakaia. His Honor said that there need be no breach of trust—it was only a matter of bookkeeping. Mr Gresson submitted that if the word ‘ as-ociation ” had been used instead of the word “institution,” there was no doubt that his clients would have been entitled to the legacy. Mr Bengali said that the ‘ trustee wonkl submit to the order of tho Court. Owing to the absence of a rep-reseiu-atiye of one of the residuary legatees it was his duty to submit tHat there might be a lapse. If his Honor could identity the society named in the will there was nothin? further to be said. If he held that there had never been such an institution the Court could frame a now scheme if it was satisfied Dint the intention was charitable. Tim Court must consider also whether the words in the will were to bn construed in their narrowest p-ei'se, as both the societies claiming tho’ legacy operated outside Christchurch. Counsel suggested that tho cost* of the case should he a charge on the legacy, H- lf \ residuary legatees were 'both cbnntaol e institutions.

His Honor said ho had no doubt as to what bo should do in tho mat)tor, rntt thought it hotter to put .his decision in writing. Judgment was accordingly reserved.