1
Husbands, Wives, and Children

An editorial on “Testamentary Habits and Peculiar Wills,” appeared in the Western Reserve Law Journal some time ago. Its excellence merits a reproduction in part:

“The laws of human nature underlie all systems of jurisprudence. Positive law is evolved out of long periods of human phenomena. The general systems of law are the composite products of innumerable generations of men. These accepted codes are supposed to embody the survivals of an immemorial struggle between right and wrong, and the highest sentiments of justice, and the clearest perfection of reason of all ages. But it is a remarkable fact that one-half of all the property in the world, in the succession of generations, is transmitted and controlled by the supreme purpose and disposition of individual men and women. The tenure of property is not always held, nor is it transmitted, according to legislative enactments or judicial law. Under the testamentary privilege secured by law the unenlightened mind often becomes the legislature which frames and promulgates the rule of descent which fixes the destiny of millions of property. The perfect freedom and untrammelled modes of expression, secured in the will-making privilege, results in the manifestation of the most normal and spontaneous spirit of the individual.

“For genuine and authentic repositories of human idiosyncrasies and whimsical peculiarities, as well as lofty sentiments and noble thoughts on high themes, there is nothing comparable with the last will and testament. There are several reasons for the existence of this fact.

“1st. The will is usually the product of grave thought and deliberation. It is the matured disposition of the individual testator, framed and published in the exercise of one of the highest and best appreciated rights granted by society to the individual. The will is also the outgrowth of the individual’s sense of duty involved in sacred domestic and family obligations and relationships.

“2d. The right to make the will confers the privilege coveted by both men and women to speak into the universal ear ‘the last word.’ The sum of man’s moral sense, and his exact ethical tone, is not infrequently concentrated in his last will.

“3d. In the ages of the world, when the agitation of religious beliefs was most prevalent, men were prone to give a summary of their opinions upon religion in their wills. The rites and ceremonies of sepulchre are often prescribed; the belief in immortality is often expressed in these sacred documents. The vanities and foibles, the whims and caprices, the eccentricities and prejudices, all leave their exact mould and expression in this important instrument. The cynic adopts this means of giving a parting blow to the unfriendly and unsympathizing world. It is said that the mould and fashion of the human form was so preserved in ancient Egypt by the embalmer’s art that the peculiar physiognomy of the Pharaohs is discovered after three thousand years of burial. This art of preservation has been lost. But in the numerous receptacles for recorded wills in Europe and America are found the mummified intellectual and spiritual remains of past generations as clearly and positively embalmed as are the bodies of the Pharaohs.

“It is interesting to note the influence of long-established customs upon the social habits of people. The present habitat of the will-making people is continental Europe. This fact is susceptible of easy explanation. The jurisprudence of the continent is founded on Roman law. Sir Henry Sumner Maine has well said: ‘To the Romans belong preËminently the credit of inventing the will, the institution which, next to the contract, has exercised the greatest influence in transforming human society.... To the Roman no evil seems to have been a heavier visitation than the forfeiture of testamentary privilege; no curse seems to have been bitterer than that imprecated upon an enemy ‘that he might die without a will.’”

*******

“The odd freaks, vagaries and vanities of men thus find permanent lodgment in testamentary remains. While these features of the will at first appear to defy classification, yet by careful examination, extending over long periods, the manifestation of unvarying habits of mind, and the existence of constant and controlling instincts and motives, are readily discovered.

“These natures of ours, when freely dealing with the subject of property, and exhibiting solemn sentiments upon duty and destiny, unconsciously yield to fundamental laws of uniform operation; and these testamentary memorials may be made to furnish much curious instruction upon psychological and sociological subjects.”

Duty of Husbands to make Wills

The following article from the pen of Harriette M. Johnston-Wood, of the New York bar, appeared in Harper’s Weekly in the issue of September 24, 1910; there is much in it which should appeal to the sense of justice and manhood of the husbands, brothers and sons of our country. The barbaric treatment of women with reference to property rights should no longer find a place in the laws of a country which boasts of its enlightenment and freedom as does the United States. It is gratifying to record that a more liberal policy is fast being adopted by the law-making bodies of our States.

Our author says:

“It has been our custom for a number of years to pass our summer vacation on the banks of Lake Seneca, where one of us was born. Here our paternal grandparents came when the country was yet a wilderness, and here they lived and died. Their wedding journey from Rensselaerwick was made in a covered wagon, in which they brought their worldly possessions, some chairs, a table, a bed, a stove, some dishes and cooking utensils. A half-dozen sheep and a cow brought up the rear of this caravan. Here they cleared the ground and built a house. Grandmother dyed and carded and spun into yarn and wove into cloth the wool from the sheep, from which she knitted the socks and mittens and made the clothing. From the flax which grew wild thereabouts she made the household linen. No small tasks were these when eventually nine children came to demand care and protection. Once a year a perambulating shoemaker came through the country, and then this small army was shod, with boots and shoes in reserve sufficient to last until his return. By and by a frame house was built, a luxury in those days; property was accumulated.

“To whom did it belong?

“In justice and equity it belonged to both parents. Each had borne the burden; each should share in the reward. But the law said no. The wife’s services belong to the husband, and their joint earnings belong to him, only the husband must support the wife. The wife owned nothing. Truly a munificent compensation for fifty years of service such as this!

“Did grandfather support grandmother? Were grandmother’s services less valuable than grandfather’s? By what righteous authority did everything belong to grandfather?—he being allowed to give or will away everything, except the use of one-third of the real estate, which grandmother might have after his death, but for her lifetime only. It was barely possible that grandmother might have liked to give or will something to her children on her own account. When she had earned it, by years of toil as hard as his, why should she not have been allowed to gratify this altogether worthy ambition?

“Forty years ago a boy and a girl married. He had nothing. She had saved five hundred dollars teaching school. They bought a farm, paying her five hundred dollars down, and taking a mortgage for the balance. Title was taken in the husband’s name. They worked together for forty years. He died, leaving no will. There were no children. Under the law of the State the property went to his brothers and sisters, all old, all well-to-do. The personalty amounted to very little. The wife’s dower, the use of one-third during her life, amounts to less than $200 a year, and this is her sole support in her old age.

“In that section of the country women can get one dollar a day for at least half the year working in fruit, tying grape-vines, putting handles on baskets, picking berries, cherries, and currants, and packing grapes, peaches and plums. Household service is always at a premium, as no one there will go out to do that kind of work. They are the descendants of the old settlers and are proud. The married women work in the fruit in the daytime, and perform their household duties at night. This means baking and cooking and stewing, and washing and ironing and mending for the hired men as well as the family. Incidentally they raise children. No one person could be hired to do this work. They do it for love, but we believe there is no insurmountable obstacle in the way of getting both love and justice; we believe that love and injustice are irreconcilable,—and if we must choose between them, my advice is to exact justice and take a chance on love.

“Would the whole estate have been more than this wife was entitled to?

“A bride was presented by her uncle with $2000, with which the thrifty bridegroom bought sheep. It proved a profitable investment, and in time they were well-to-do. At the expiration of fifty years of matrimony and mutual toil (which included the rearing of six children) the husband died. By his last will and testament he gave to his beloved wife two thousand dollars in cash, or her dower interest in his real estate. The wife took the cash. Her original two thousand dollars for fifty years then amounted to about $60,000.

“This shows that a wife may be considered to be a good investment.

*******

“A clerk in a delicatessen store in a large city married a German governess. They started a similar store of their own and lived in the rear. The wife did the housework and the cooking and baking for the store, and between times waited on customers. They were frugal and prospered. After twenty years the husband died. The wife naturally thought she was entitled to the property, at least a portion of it. But the husband had made a will prior to his marriage, whereby he devised his property to his brothers and sisters.”

*******

“The staple argument of the opponents of equal laws for men and women is that wives are privileged in that they can do with their own as they like, while the husbands cannot. But is the property the husband’s any more than the wife’s when they accumulate it jointly? Up to the marriageable age girls earn nothing; after marriage their services belong to their husbands. Where is the opportunity to accumulate property which shall be their very own in the eyes of the law, with which they may do as they like? What provision can they make for possible incapacity and certain old age if they live?”

Will of a Chinaman

There was filed in the Surrogate’s Office of Queens County, New York, on October 1, 1910, what the newspapers refer to as the queerest instrument ever recorded in New York City. The testator was John Ling, a Chinaman, of Woodbridge, New Jersey.

The original will was probated in Middlesex County, New Jersey, but as Ling was the owner of considerable real estate in Queens County, before settlement could be made an exemplified copy of the will had to be filed there.

It appears that John Ling, Jr., a son of the deceased, had taken an Irish bride, much against the will of his father. The Chinaman was enraged, and talked long and earnestly with his son upon the subject. But to no avail. The young man refused to leave his Irish bride. When the old man died, he left the following will:

“First, I leave and bequeath to John Ling, my son, the sum of $1. With the said sum of $1, or 100 cents, I wish that he would purchase a rope strong and long enough to support his Irish wife; the said sum of $1 to be paid six months after my decease by my wife, her heirs or executors.

“Secondly, I leave and bequeath to my wife, Mary Ling, all property, whether in America or England, that I may be possessed of, during her natural life; and at her death said property is to be equally divided between Samson and Mary Ling, son and daughter of John and Mary Ling; and should neither Samson nor Mary survive to come in possession of the said property now belonging to John and Mary Ling, the property is then to descend unto John Ling, the son of Joseph Ling, my nephew, now residing in Europe, with the exception of the $1 to be paid to my son, John Ling.”

Two Hundred Dollars for a Husband

According to the New York Sun, an attractive young German woman of Washington, D.C., walked into a newspaper office in that city on October 11, 1910, and requested the insertion of the following advertisement:

“‘Young woman, fairly wealthy, from foreign country, desires to meet at once some poor young man. Object, matrimony.’

“She gave her name as Eugenie Adams, but admitted that this was an assumed name. She said she was willing to give her prospective husband a bonus of $200. She explained that her uncle, who lived in Germany, had named her as the beneficiary in his will, provided she married in a week.

“‘You see it is this way,’ she explained with a German accent, ‘my old uncle is very eccentric. He lives in the Fatherland, where all my people are. He has named me the beneficiary of his will if I am married by a week from to-day. I am very poor. I want the money. I plan to get married in order to obtain it. I will pay any young man $200 to marry me.

“‘But I will be no trouble to him,’ she continued. ‘I will get a divorce from him at once and never see him again. I do not want to remain married. I only want to return to Germany at once with my marriage papers. Could a man make $200 in an easier way?’

“She declined to give the amount of the legacy she expected to obtain through her marriage.”

The Result

The St. Louis Times in a recent editorial comments on the “Two-hundred-dollar Husband,” as follows:

“We have been much interested in a story which has been telegraphed from Washington, and which relates the circumstances under which a presentable fraulein bought a husband, in order that she might inherit an estate—which was willed her on the condition that she marry within a given time.

“She appears to have wanted the estate badly, though the idea of having a husband did not appeal to her at all. Perhaps there was a ruddy faced Heine at home with whom she had danced in the old days, and who still held her heart in thrall. Be that as it may—as Laura Jean Libbey would say—she married her emergency husband in Washington only because she had to, in order to get the estate.

“She did not wish ever to see her husband again, and when a sailor appeared in response to her advertisement, she rather liked the looks of him—for the occasion at hand—but decided, wisely, that he would not do, because ‘he travelled around the world, and she might see him again.’ She finally decided in favor of one Harry Oliver Brown, who wore a flowing sandy mustache, and a celluloid collar, and carried a walking-stick. We should have thought the flowing sandy mustache would have been enough, though we have no objection to the celluloid collar and the walking-stick, if they be thought to possess a corroborative value.

“And so the two were married, and Mrs. Brown gave her hired husband $200 and bade him good-by and left, without even saying she would hurry back, and boarded a ship for the Fatherland, where the estate was—and, presumably, is.

“We have related this quaint fable because it seems to possess a valuable idea for those who contemplate matrimony, not because they consider themselves fitted for it in any way, but because they feel they ‘have to get married’—so much the slave to public opinion are many estimable young people.

“If the thing has to be done, we commend the method of Mrs. Harry Oliver Brown. A sandy mustache, a celluloid collar, and a walking-stick can always be had for a song—and there is not a very heavy percentage of sailors.”

Knew her Disposition

It is recorded of an old English farmer, that, in giving instructions for his will, he directed a legacy of one hundred pounds be given to his widow. Being informed that some distinction was usually made in case the widow married again, he doubled the sum; and when told that this was quite contrary to custom, he said, with heartfelt sympathy for his possible successor, “Aye, but him as gets her’ll deserve it.”

Clothes on a Hickory Limb

The will of Charles C. Dickinson, former president of the Carnegie Trust Company, who died a few months ago, contains a bequest of $4000 for the education of his son Charles, at Cornell, with the strange stipulation that the son shall forfeit this allowance if he goes “to or upon Cayuga Lake.”

The lake is used by the Cornell crews and by students for canoeing and sailing.

To a nephew he leaves $2000 for educational purposes, with the same restrictions regarding Cayuga Lake.

Sarcastic Will

A British sailor requested his executors to pay to his wife one shilling, wherewith to buy hazelnuts, as she had always preferred cracking nuts to mending his stockings.

A Contrite Husband

J. Withipol of Walthamstow, Essex County, England, left his landed estates to his wife, “trusting, yea, I may say, as I think, assuring myself, that she will marry no man, for fear to meet with so evil a husband as I have been to her.”

Aunt Lunky’s Will

The author has sought with little success for wills which would portray the character of the negro race, although the aid of Mr. Booker T. Washington was enlisted in this behalf. One, however, is offered:

Aunt Lunky was a negro servant and resided in Jacksonville, Illinois. For several generations, she had lived with the same family and had been a party to all household duties and functions during that period: she made her will, and her savings, some two hundred and fifty dollars, she left to “little Billie.” “Little Billie” was the great-grandson of her employer, and the pet of the household: in order that there might be no mistake in identifying the legatee, a picture of the baby boy was securely attached to the testament.

Will of the Duchesse de Praslin

By her will made in 1784, this testatrix, strangely enough, disinherited her own children, being falsely persuaded that her husband had substituted for them others whom he had had by an actress. She made her legatees the grandchildren of the Prince de Soubise, whom she did not even know. Her will was contested, and set aside. It contained another singular bequest—that by which she left to her husband a model of the Cheval de Bronze (the equestrian statue of Henri IV. on the Pont Neuf).

Must ever Pray

Not long ago an Italian nobleman left all his money, which amounted to about $50,000, to his wife, “to be disposed of according to her own ideas,” provided she entered a religious order and spent the rest of her life praying for the repose of his soul. If she refused the conditions, the money went to the order direct, and she got nothing.

The poor woman is now fighting the will in court, and there is said to be some prospect that the estate will be divided and one-half, or at least a life interest in the income, given to her. This, however, can be done only by compromise.

The reason for this strange condition is said to have been revenge. The wife had a lover, and the husband did not discover the fact until during his last sickness, when she neglected previous precautions and he learned of her flirtations. The husband was also afraid that she would marry her lover, and is said to have told his lawyer that he would fix things so that the scoundrel could not have the benefit of his money, even if he did enjoy the affections of his wife.

A Cold World

Ellen H. Cooper, West Somerset Street, Philadelphia, died recently. Pathos and worldly wisdom are mingled in her will. She wrote the instrument with her own hand. It follows in part:

“All the money and furniture I have has been saved through my earnings and hard work, therefore, I wish my two sons, John W. Cooper and Bernard M. Cooper, to follow to the letter my wishes.

“My one real anxiety has been their future after my death. They cannot now realize what a lonely life theirs will be without home or parents, for I know, except one has money, there is no one to care what becomes of one. Therefore I have saved for one purpose, that if either, or both, live to be old and unable to work you may find a home and pay so much to be kept the rest of their lives. There will be enough left to clothe you. All I am possessed of I want put out at interest. I do not want one cent of it spent otherwise, excepting what it takes to pay my funeral expenses. Remember, dear boys, this is a cold world and I would long since have been glad to lay down my burden had it not been for my love for you.”

Beautiful Sentiments to Wives

As an expression of controlling impulses and ideas, the will has ever been associated with the home and family life. Some of the purest and sweetest sentiments of the human heart are often contained in these legal muniments. They are often the permanent repositories of the loftiest feelings of conjugal and domestic affection. More than fifty per cent of the wills made bequeath the bulk of the estate, absolutely or for life, to the surviving spouse.

A beautiful expression of this holy sentiment of affection is found in the will of John Starkey, probated in 1861. This testator says: “The remainder of my wealth is vested in the affection of my dear wife, with whom I leave it, in the good hope of resuming it more pure, bright and precious, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where there are no railways or monetary panics or fluctuations of exchange, but steadfast, though progressive and unspeakable riches of glory and immortality.”

The following is another example of solicitude for a devoted wife. Sharon Turner, the eminent author of the “History of the Anglo-Saxons,” dying in his eightieth year, in 1847, left this testimonial to his wife, who had died before him: “It is my comfort to have remembered that I have passed with her nearly forty-nine years of unabated affection and connubial happiness, and yet she is still living, as I earnestly hope and believe, under her Saviour’s care, in a superior state of being.” He was anxious that her portrait, which he directed should be painted and bequeathed, should correctly represent her. He then adds: “None of the portraits of my beloved wife give any adequate representation of her beautiful face, nor of the sweet and intellectual and attractive appearance of her living features and general countenance and character.”

Kindness to Widows

Testators in the present day frequently and ungallantly leave property to their widows only so long as they shall remain unmarried. In looking through some of the wills of the time of Henry VII., we do not find such a condition attached. There are many instances to be found, however, of the husband’s affectionate care for the future comfort of his wife. To quote two or three: First, from the will of William Parker: “Also I make Master John Aggecombe, Alderman of Oxford, my overseer, to se my last will performed; and I geve to hym for his labour my best crymsyn gowne so that he be frendly to Alice my wife.” In the will of Robert Offe, of Boston, Lincolnshire, after appointing Master Thomas Robynson and Master John Robynson overseers, he goes on to say: “And I beseche you, maisters both, that ye be good frends unto my wyf, and that ye will help her.” William Holybrande, gentleman citizen and “tailler” of London, bequeaths to each of his executors, William Bodley and William Grove, for their labor, £5 sterling, and “to be goode and kynde to my wyfe.” He appoints as overseer, “Robert Joyns, my cousin, one of the gentleman ushers of the chambre of our Sovaigne Lorde the Kynge,” and bequeaths to him £5 sterling “for his labour, and that he may help my wyfe in all her troubill, if any shall happen to her here after.” He also gives and bequeaths “to Roger Delle, my servant, so that he be lovyng and gentill to my wyfe, and give a trewe accompte for such besynese as he hath reconyng of, £5 sterlinge.” These three wills were all proved in 1505.

Would not be Good

In 1772, a gentleman of Surrey, England, died, and his will being opened was found to contain this peculiar clause, “Whereas, it was my misfortune to be made very uneasy by ——, my wife, for many years from our marriage, by her turbulent behavior, for she was not content to despise my admonitions, but she contrived every method to make me unhappy; she was so perverse in her nature that she would not be reclaimed, but seemed only to be born to be a plague to me; the strength of Samson, the knowledge of Homer, the prudence of Augustus, the cunning of Pyrrhus, the patience of Job, the subtlety of Hannibal and the watchfulness of Hermogenes could not have been sufficient to subdue her; for no skill or force in the world would make her good; and as we have lived separate and apart from each other for eight years, and, she having perverted her son to leave and totally abandon me, therefore, I give her a shilling.”

Must remain at Home

The last will and testament of Lawrence Engler was admitted to probate September 19, 1910, at Columbus, Ohio. It disposes of an estate valued at $10,000. He was killed in a recent wreck on the Hocking Valley Railroad near Toledo.

He provides in his will that his widow and their children be given the proceeds resulting from the rent of his property and that they all must remain at home. When they leave, they forfeit all rights to the income.

So long as they live together they are to share the income, but when one leaves he loses his interest.

This arrangement is to remain during the life of all, but no provision is made for the disposal of the remainder.

The will is peculiar in another way. The testator, after its execution, took the liberty of striking out some of the provisions without having the amendments witnessed. He failed to make a codicil, but does say that he did the scratching himself.

Danger in Mutual Wills

The wills of Mrs. Mary Louise Woeltge and Professor Albert Woeltge were filed in the Probate Court at Stamford, Connecticut, on September 20, 1910, and they reveal a somewhat unusual situation. Professor Woeltge was the first to pass away at Walpole, New Hampshire, on September 12th. His wife died there a day later. Both left wills executed April 11, 1895. Professor Woeltge left all his estate to his wife and appointed her sole executrix. Mrs. Woeltge by her will left all her property to her husband.

Professor Woeltge inserted a clause by way of explanation to his nephew, Albert A. Woeltge, and his niece, Lillie Woeltge, both of New York, of this disposition of the estate. It was, in effect, that the money by which he acquired the property disposed of in the will came most, if not all of it, from his wife or her mother.

Professor Woeltge left two letters, one addressed to his wife and the other to his niece and nephew. The letter to his wife carried a direct expression of desire that on her death all the money he left her go to the children of his brother William, “that they might know that I loved them best after you.” The question arises as to who will get the property.

The Worst of Women

Henry, Earl of Stafford, who followed the fortunes of his royal master James II., and attended him in his exile to France, married there the daughter of the Duc de Grammont, at the end of the seventeenth century. The marriage was a most unhappy one, and, after fourteen years’ endurance of the disgraceful conduct of his wife, he wrote as follows in his will:

“To the worst of women, Claude Charlotte de Grammont, unfortunately my wife, guilty as she is of all crimes, I leave five-and-forty brass halfpence, which will buy a pullet for her supper. A better gift than her father can make her; for I have known when, having not the money, neither had he the credit for such a purchase; he being the worst of men, and his wife the worst of women, in all debaucheries. Had I known their characters I had never married their daughter, and made myself unhappy.”

Took the Son’s Part

Sir Robert Bevill, Knight, who held an official position at court under James I., was the representative of an old Hunts family, and held by entail the estates of Chesterton in that county. Dying in 1635, his will, which it appears was made within a very short time of his death, was proved, and in it occur the following clauses relative to his wife and his daughter’s husband, with whom he died at enmity. These vindictive behests, be it observed, are preceded by a very devout and godly preface, bequeathing his soul “into the hands of its Maker, stedfastly believing in, and by the merits of, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to obteyne free pardon and forgiveness of al my sinnes, and at the last day to have and receive a glorious resurrection.”

Immediately follows: “I give and bequeath to my son-in-law, Sir John Hewell, Baronet, tenn shillings and noe more, in respect he stroke and ceaselessly fought with mee.

“Item: I give unto my wyfe tenn shillings in respect she took her sonnes part against me, and did anymate and comfort him afterwards. These will not be forgotten.” Furthermore, the testator, in resentment against his said wife—“inasmuch as she hath not only deserted mee, but hath taken into her own possession all her own goods, and hath disposed of them at her own pleasure”—declares his determination “to make no ampler provision for her.”

He concludes this vindictive will by leaving all his large estates to his second son.

This will is not exactly of the class alluded to by Steele in one of his plays, where he makes one of the characters, a widow, remark, “There is no will of an husband so cheerfully obeyed as his last.”

Accused of every Crime

John Parker, a bookseller, living in Old Bond Street, served his wife in the following manner, leaving her no more than fifty pounds, and in the following words:

“To one Elizabeth Parker, whom through fondness I made my wife, without regard to family, fame, or fortune, and who in return has not spared most unjustly to accuse me of every crime regarding human nature, except highway robbery, I bequeath the sum of fifty pounds.”

Between the Lines

A rich man, making his will, left legacies to all his servants except his steward, to whom he gave nothing, on the plea that, “having been in my service in that capacity twenty years I have too high an opinion of his shrewdness to suppose he has not sufficiently enriched himself.”

Menial Service Required

A year or two ago, a Russian gentleman, living at Odessa, bequeathed four million roubles to his four nieces, but they were to receive the money only after having worked for a year as washerwomen, chambermaids or farm servants. These conditions were carried out, and while occupying such humble positions, it is gratifying to learn that they received over eight hundred and sixty offers of marriage.

No Mustaches

The will of Mr. Henry Budd, which came into force in 1862, declared against the wearing of mustaches by his sons, in the following terms: “In case my son Edward shall wear mustaches, then the devise hereinbefore contained in favour of him, his appointees, heirs, and assigns of my said estate called Pepper Park, shall be void; and I devise the same estate to my son William, his appointees, heirs, and assigns. And in case my said son William shall wear mustaches, then the devise hereinbefore contained in favour of him, his appointees, heirs, and assigns of my said estate called Twickenham Park, shall be void; and I devise the said estate to my said son Edward, his appointees, heirs, and assigns.”

Will of William Pym

The will of William Pym, of Woolavington, Somerset, gent., is worth citing for its originality. It bears date January 10, 1608.

After various charitable bequests, the last of which specifies the sum of twelvepence to the church at Wells, he proceeds:

“I give to Agnes, which I did a long time take for my wyfe—till shee denyd me to be her husband, all though wee were marryd with my friends’ consent, her father, mother, and uncle at it; and now she swareth she will neither love mee nor evyr bee perswaded to, by preechers, nor by any other, which hath happened within these few yeres. And Toby Andrewes, the beginner, which I did see with mine own eyes when hee did more than was fitting, and this by means of others their abettors. I have lived a miserable life this six or seven yeres, and now I leve the revenge to God—and tenn pounds to buy her a gret horse, for I could not this manny yeres plese her with one gret enough.”

Two years after writing this bitter record of his wrongs, William Pym, gent., gave up the ghost, and his last wishes were faithfully carried out by his two executors.

Contrary to Roosevelt’s Idea

The malevolence of some men is manifested in their deaths, as well as in their lives. A certain wealthy man left this provision in his will: “Should my daughter marry and be afflicted with children, the trustees are to pay out of said legacy, Ten Thousand Dollars on the birth of the first child, to the —— Hospital; Twenty Thousand Dollars, on the second; Thirty Thousand Dollars, on the third; and an additional Ten Thousand Dollars on the birth of each fresh child, till the One Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars is exhausted. Should any portion of this sum be left at the end of twenty years, the balance is to be paid to her to use as she thinks fit.” This item would, no doubt, interest our late President, Theodore Roosevelt.

Wife’s Desertion Rewarded

A certain Glasgow doctor died some ten years ago, and left his whole estate to his sisters. In his will appeared this unusual clause: “To my wife, as a recompense for deserting me and leaving me in peace, I expect the said sister, Elizabeth, to make her a gift of ten shillings sterling, to buy her a pocket handkerchief to weep after my decease.”

Would not wear the Cap

A husband left his wife sixty thousand dollars, to be increased to one hundred and twenty thousand dollars, provided she wore a widow’s cap after his death. She accepted the larger amount, wore the cap for six months, and then put it off. A lawsuit followed, but the judge gave the widow a judgment and stated that the word “always” should have been inserted. Shortly after the rendition of the judgment, the widow entered into the state of matrimony.

Strange Requirement as to Marriage

In 1805, Mr. Edward Hurst left a very large fortune to his only son on condition that the latter should seek out and marry a young lady, whom the father, according to his own statement, had, by acts for which he prayed forgiveness, reduced to the extremity of poverty; or failing her, her nearest unmarried female heir. The latter, by the irony of fate, turned out to be a spinster of fifty-five, who, professing herself willing to carry out her share of the imposed duty, was duly united to the young man, who had just reached his majority.

A Happy Wife

Many wills have reference to the domestic felicity, or otherwise, experienced by those who executed them. As an example of the former, we may give the following passage from the testament of Lady Palmerston, an ancestress of the celebrated Premier. Referring to her husband, she says, “As I have long given you my heart and tenderest affections and fondest wishes have always been yours, so is everything else that I possess; and all that I can call mine being already yours, I have nothing to give but my heartiest thanks for the care and kindness you have at all times shown me, either in sickness or in health, for which God Almighty will, I hope, reward you in a better world.” Then, for “form’s sake,” follow several specific bequests.

Must walk Barefooted

A wife who domineers over her husband sometimes discovers that she has made a serious mistake. Ten years ago the London (England) newspapers reported that a publican (housekeeper) took a curious revenge on a nagging wife, whose sharp tongue had given him many bad days while he lived. When his will was read, she learned that in order to receive any property she must walk barefooted to the market-place each time the anniversary of his death came around. Holding a candle in her hand, she was there to read a paper confessing her unseemly behavior to her husband while he lived, and stating that had her tongue been shorter, her husband’s days would probably have been longer. By refusing to comply with these terms she had to be satisfied with “twenty pounds a year to keep her off the parish.”

Anticipating the Past

It was Mrs. Malaprop in Sheridan’s delightful comedy, “The Rivals,” who declined to “anticipate the past.”

Mr. John B. Luther, whose will is given below, certainly had the past in mind when the instrument was drawn; it seems clear that he desired to “anticipate the past” in so far as a provision for forgotten widows and children was concerned. The testator formerly lived in Fall River, Massachusetts, but his will was probated in San Francisco; he left an estate valued at more than $100,000.

“I do hereby declare that I am not married and that I have no children. I have noticed, however, the facility with which sworn testimony can be procured and produced in support of the claims of alleged widows and adopted children, and the frequent recurrence of such claims in recent years. I therefore make express provision in this my last will as follows: I give and bequeath to such person as shall be found, proved, and established to be my surviving wife or widow, whether the marriage be found to have taken place before or after the execution of this will, the sum of $5, and to each and every person who shall be found, proved, and established to be my child by birth, adoption, acknowledgment, or otherwise, and whether before or after the execution of this will, the sum of $5, and I declare that I do intentionally omit to make for any of the persons in this paragraph referred to any other or further provision.”

2
ANIMALS

Lower Animals have Souls

The Peoples Pulpit, a publication issued by the “Brooklyn Tabernacle,” in a recent issue under the title, “What is a Soul?” says:

“Thus we see why it is that the Scriptures speak of ‘souls’ in connection with the lower animals. They, as well as man, are sentient beings or creatures of intelligence, only of lower orders. They, as well as man, can see, hear, feel, taste and smell; and each can reason up to the standard of his own organism, though none can reason as abstrusely nor on as high a plane as man. This difference is not because man has a different kind of life from that possessed by the lower animals; for all have similar vital forces, from the same fountain or source of life, the same Creator; all sustain life in the same manner, by the digestion of similar foods, producing blood, and muscles, and bones, etc., each according to his kind or nature; and each propagates his species similarly, bestowing the life, originally from God, upon his posterity. They differ in shape and in mental capacity.

“Nor can it be said that while man is a soul (or intelligent being) beasts are without this soul-quality or intelligence, thought, feeling. On the contrary, both man and beast have soul-quality or intelligent, conscious being. Not only is this the statement of Scripture, but it is readily discernible as a fact, as soon as the real meaning of the word ‘soul’ is comprehended, as shown in the foregoing. To illustrate: Suppose the creation of a perfect dog; and suppose that creation had been particularly described, as was Adam’s, what difference of detail could be imagined? The body of a dog created would not be a dog until the breath of life would be caused to energize that body; then it would be a living creature with sensibilities and powers all its own—a living soul of the lower order, called dog, as Adam, when he received life, became a living creature with sensibilities and powers all his own—a living soul of the highest order of flesh beings, called man.”

A Heaven for Beasts

Bishop Butler and Theodore Parker offered the suggestion that there is a future for beasts, and a poem has been dedicated “To my Pony in Heaven,” by Mr. Sewell of Exeter College.

Goldfish and Flowers

A certain lady left seventy pounds a year for the maintenance of three goldfish, which were to be identified as follows: “one is bigger than the other two, and these latter are to be easily recognized, as one is fat and the other lean.” She also made provision for flowers to be placed upon the graves of the gold fish.

Bequest to a Fish

We have heard of lucky dogs often enough—instances of lucky fish are more rare, yet we can tell of two carps who have been testamentarily benefited. One is, or rather was, too well known to the tourist who has seen Fontainebleau, to need more than a passing mention, as he only paid the debt of nature a few years ago, having occupied the royal pond, it is said, more than a century, probably in order to bear out the proverb which gives long lives to annuitants; the other was the mute but valued friend of the Count of Mirandola, who had been in his intimacy since 1805, dwelling in an elegant antique piscina, shaded by tropical plants, in an oriel of his salon at Lucca, where he was still living as late as 1835, and may be there still. The count, dying in 1825, left him a handsome annuity, with special directions for his treatment.

Bequest to a Parrot

A rich and eccentric widow, whose will was proved in London some years ago, left at her death a parrot, whom, “having been her faithful companion for 24 years,” she left in charge of an appointee, with an annuity of one hundred guineas, the existence and identity of the bird to be proved twice a year, and all payments to be withheld from the moment the feathered pensioner ceased to be produced.

Polly wants a Contest

In July last, at Washington, D.C., a will contest was commenced, which involves the life or death of a parrot.

It appears Mrs. Ottilie Stock left a will, by the terms of which her parrot was doomed to Oslerization by the process of chloroform. Her daughter, Elizabeth Stock, questioned the validity of the will. It seems that Elizabeth was left one dollar in money, two kitchen chairs, two pails and one broom; hence, the will contest.

Mrs. Stock, the testatrix, was the mother of one of the men who went to his death on the ill-fated battleship Maine, in the harbor of Havana.

What behavior induced the death sentence on Polly, is not known.

Will of Mrs. Elizabeth Hunter

This lady, a resident of London, having for many years enjoyed the society of a pet parrot, and being anxious as to the fate of her favorite after her death, bequeathed an annuity of £200, to be paid quarterly, so long as the parrot should live and its identity be satisfactorily proved. This annuity of £50 quarterly was left in the first instance to Mrs. Mary Dyer, of Park Street, Westminster, with a proviso that should that trustee die before the parrot, the sum should continue to be paid to some “respectable female who should not be a servant.” One would think the testatrix must have had in her mind the story of Gay’s cat—“Nor cruel Tom nor Susan heard!” Moreover, it was to dwell in a cage that was to cost not less than £20, and which was to be “high, long, large and roomy”; the bird also was “not to be taken out of England.” This will was probated in 1813.

A Caged Annuitant

An elderly spinster, by name Caroline Hunter, wishing to provide for a favorite parrot, bequeathed the bird with a legacy of one thousand pounds to a widow, a friend of hers, giving her power to transfer both the pet and the money to any third person, provided it were to one of the female sex, who would undertake not to leave England. There was a special bequest of twenty guineas to provide a very high and handsome cage, into which the parrot was to be removed, and the executors were charged, in the event of the charge and bequest being refused by the widow, to see that the parrot was committed to the care of some trustworthy, respectable person. The will concludes: “I will and desire that whoever attempts to dispute this my last will and testament, or by any means tries to frustrate these my intentions, shall forfeit whatever I have left him, her, or them. And if any one to whom I have left legacies attempt to bring any bill or charge against me, it is my will and desire they shall forfeit whatever legacy I may have left them. I owe nothing to any one—many owe me gratitude and money, but none have paid me either.”

Horses to be Shot

Frederick Christian Winslow was born in 1752; he was Councillor of State, professor of surgery, and knight of the order of Danebrog. His works on surgery have been translated into almost all the languages of Europe. He was grand-nephew of the celebrated anatomist, James Benignus Winslow. He died at Copenhagen, June 24, 1811.

His will disposes of property amounting to 37,000 crowns, but contains only one clause which can be considered singular, viz.: that which orders that his carriage-horses should be shot, lest after his death they come to be ill-treated by any person who might buy them.

Will in Favor of a Horse

Among the archives of Toulouse exists the registry of a singular will, made by a countryman of the immediate environs in 1781. This peasant, who was the owner of a considerable sum of money, besides his house and the land surrounding it, had no children, but had attached himself to a horse he always rode, though it does not seem to have been particularly comely in appearance. His affection for this animal was very constant; for, finding himself seriously ill, and having decided on making his will, he disposed of all his property in favor of the four-footed favorite in these terms: “I declare that I appoint my russet cob my universal heir, and I desire that he may belong to my nephew George.”

As may be supposed, the will was contested; but, strange to say, it was ultimately confirmed. An experienced jurisconsult, by name Claude Serres, professor of “droit civil” at Montpellier, has cited the case, and gives the reason for the decision arrived at, viz.: “That the will being pronounced valid, the succession of the testator was adjudicated to the nephew whom he had designated as proprietor of the horse, because it was ruled that the simplicity of the rustic should secure to him the execution of his last will, and that, having named his nephew as legatee of the horse, he intended he should have it endowed with the bequests he had bestowed upon it.”

Horses as Legatees

A curious will contest was instituted in January, 1911, in the Hungarian courts. This contest turns upon the legality of the will of an eccentric nobleman, Emile von Bizony, brother of a well-known deputy, who left all his real and personal property, amounting to about $200,000, to be used in behalf of his twelve draught horses.

As executor of his will, he named the Society for the Protection of Animals at Budapest, stipulating that the interest on his estate should be devoted to the care of his twelve draught horses, and that upon the death of one of them another aged horse was to be taken in and cared for, so that the number of twelve might always be maintained.

Herr von Bizony was sixty-five years of age, a confirmed misogynist, and at odds with all his relatives, who were naturally amazed at the contents of the will. His brother, the Deputy, Herr Alusins von Bizony, disputed the will. Negotiations were made with the above-mentioned society, and $20,000 was offered it, but refused, the society bringing an action against the Bizony family for the retention of the property.

Two Thousand Dollars for a Horse

An Irishman, James Gilwee, died in 1907 in Carondelet, a subdivision of the city of Saint Louis: by his will, filed in the Probate Court of the city of Saint Louis, he left two thousand dollars in trust, the revenue from which was to be used in the support and comfort of a favorite horse, “Tony”: the children of the deceased carefully respected the wishes of their father, and the horse was shipped to Bloomington, Illinois, where corn is plentiful and meadow grass is blue, and the horse received every attention until his death, which occurred quite recently. The two thousand dollars was thereupon divided between the heirs.

Domestic Pets

Mrs. Elizabeth Balls, late of Park Lodge, Streatham, England, whose will was proved on the 5th of November, 1875, bequeathed to the Cancer Hospital, £2,000 Consols; to the Institution for the Deaf and Dumb, Old Kent Road, £1000 Consols; to the Blind Schools, Southwark, a like sum; to the Idiots’ Asylum, Earlswood, £500 Consols; and to Guy’s and St. Thomas’s hospitals, the like sum each. She directed that her late husband’s cob mare and greyhound should not be sold, but that the former should be kept in a comfortable, warm, loose box, as she had been kept since her late master’s death; that she should not be put to work either in or out of harness, and that her back should not be crossed by any member of her late husband’s family, but that she should be ridden by a person of light weight, not above four days a week, and not more than one hour each day, at a walking pace. For the support of this mare Mrs. Balls left £65 per annum, and for the keep and care of the greyhound £5 per annum.

Bank Stock for a Dog

The late Mrs. T. P. Roe, of Canada, bequeathed to her little dog, Frolic, the interest on four shares of Montreal Bank stock for use during his lifetime, and at his death the same was to be sold and given to the Church of St. John the Evangelist.

Dog painted by Landseer

For his faithful companion Pincher, Lord Eldon in 1838 made a testamentary provision, bequeathing him to Lady Frances Bankes, with an annuity of eight pounds during the term of his natural life, for his maintenance.

“His attachment to this animal,” says Lord Campbell, “was very affecting. He used to say while he caressed him: ‘Poor Pincher belonged to poor William Henry, and after I took the Sacrament with him when he was dying, he called me back as I was leaving the room and said: “Father, you will take care of poor Pincher.”

“‘The dog was brought home to me when all was over, and in a short time he was missed; he was immediately sought for, and it was found he had gone back and was lying on the bed beside his dead master.’ He had another story about this dog which was decoyed away by a dog-stealer, and recovered by the Ex-Chancellor compounding felony with the thief. On receiving a letter signed, ‘An Amateur Dog-fancier,’ a negotiation was opened which led to Lord Eldon sending a servant with a five-pound note to a house in Cow Cross Street, where Pincher was found. The man being dealt with ‘on honour,’ freely disclosed the secrets of his trade, and in answer to a gentle reproach, replied: ‘Why, what can we do? Now that Parliament has stopped our trade in procuring bodies for the surgeons, we are obliged to turn to this to get an honest livelihood.’

“Pincher is introduced into several portraits of his master, who said: ‘Poor fellow! he has a right to be painted with me, for when my man Smith took him the other day to a law bookseller’s, where there happened to be several lawyers, they all received him with great respect, and the master of the shop exclaimed: “How very like he is to old Eldon, particularly when he wore a wig!—but, indeed, many people say he is the handsomer chap of the two.’”

“After Lord Eldon’s death, Pincher was painted by that consummate judge of the canine race, Sir Edwin Landseer, who remarked of him: ‘He is a very picturesque old dog, with a wonderful look of cleverness in his face.’ He has represented him listening to the ticking of a watch given to the Chancellor by George III.”

A Dog’s Hospital

An old lady who died in Paris in December, 1876, left a singular legacy to the city of Marseilles, being 85,000 francs, for the purpose of founding within its precincts an hospital—“pour les chiens et les chevaux malheureux.” M. Mertin, a notary of Paris, it was who received the will of Madame Veuve Perren, nÉe Enouf, and who communicated its dispositions to M. Maglione, mayor of Marseilles.

Chloroform and Water for Animals

There is on file in the city of Saint Louis, Missouri, the will of Phoebe Deliah Nye, which contains, among others, these items:

“Item: I direct my Executor, immediately upon taking charge of my estate, to end the life of my faithful dog, Lily, by the application of chloroform, it being my desire to spare her from ending her days without that care which she would receive if I were living.

“Item: I direct my Trustee to establish, erect and maintain in various parts of the City of Saint Louis, Drinking Fountains and Places where both man and beast may at all times, both day and night, have fresh water to drink; convenient of access to all and free from any expense to them.

“It is my will and I direct that each and every one of such drinking places shall be so arranged that dogs and cats may drink, and that they may be permitted to do so freely; such drinking places are to be selected where they will be most needed and be most useful and in as many different places as possible, and particularly in the more congested and more frequented portions of the city.

“Item: I authorize and empower my Trustee to expend one-half of the Corpus and all of the net revenue from my estate in the establishing, erecting, and maintaining of the drinking places.

“Item: I authorize and empower my Trustee to employ such persons as in its judgment may be necessary to maintain and look after these drinking places at an expense not to exceed one-fourth of the net income and revenue from the trust estate; and to carry out my intent, my Trustee is authorized to purchase or to lease sufficient ground, upon which to establish such drinking places, and to accept donations and gifts of property, real and personal, to be added to the trust fund to be used in the same way and for the same purposes.”

Chronometers and Dogs

Sir James South, the astronomer, by his will, which was proved in 1868, gave a pocket-chronometer each to the Earl of Shaftesbury, the Earl of Rosse, and Mr. A. J. Stephens, the condition in each case being that the chronometer should be carried in the pantaloon pocket of the wearer, according to the habit of the testator. Sir James South also left £30 a year to one of his female servants during the lifetime of a favorite terrier named “Tiger”; and this animal was produced in the Equity Court in 1872, when a question arose as to its existence. On behalf of the dog or its keeper, it was asked that a sum of £1000 Consols should be set apart to meet the annuity, but the Vice-Chancellor held that the rules of the court, which applied to human beings, did not extend to dogs, and said that the executor’s personal undertaking for the rest of the dog’s life would be sufficient.

A Lover of the Canine Race

In the Gazetta del Popolo of Turin, of September 2, 1874, is found the following:

“Last week was opened by Zanini, the notary public, the will of a certain L. C., who, after having made a considerable fortune by means of the journal, the Caroccio, disposed of it in the following manner:

“‘I leave to the municipality of Casale an annuity of 1500 lire from the public debt, to be employed in rescuing all the dogs that shall fall into the hands of the civic dog-seizer (accalappiatore).

“‘I leave to my dog Schmid a rent from the public funds of 500 lire annually, to revert after his death to the foundlings of the city.’”

Lucky Dogs

Many valuable bequests have been made to dogs, and other domestic pets. Dr. Christiano, of Venice, left sixty thousand florins for the maintenance of his three dogs, with a condition that, at their death, the sum should be added to the funds of the University of Vienna.

Sambo and Romp

A Mr. Thomas Edmett, an Englishman, died in October, 1871, having by a codicil to his will, made in 1861, bequeathed as follows: “I bequeath to my faithful servant Elizabeth Osborne, on condition that she take care of my favorite dog, an annuity of £50 for her life, to be paid to her quarterly.” The annuity was given to her for her separate use, with a restraint on anticipation. The testator had at the time of making his will a favorite dog named Romp, which died before him. He, however, subsequently had another favorite dog called Sambo, which was in his possession at the time of his death. Elizabeth Osborne had taken care of Sambo as well as Romp. She claimed to be entitled to the annuity of £50 discharged from the condition of taking care of the dog.

The Vice-Chancellor held that Elizabeth Osborne was entitled to the annuity of £50 for her life. He hoped she would take care of Sambo, but he should not make the annuity contingent on her doing so.

Dog Saved his Life

A singular will was that of Mr. Berkeley, an Englishman of fortune, who died on the 5th May, 1805, at Knightsbridge. By this instrument he left a pension of twenty-five pounds to four of his dogs, having a particular affection for animals. Some one having observed to him that a portion of the sums he spent on them would be better employed in relieving his fellow-men, he replied, “Men have attempted my life, whereas it was to a dog that I own that I am alive.”

And, indeed, it appeared that during a journey through France and Italy this gentleman, being attacked by brigands, had been protected and saved by his dog; the four animals he pensioned by his will were the descendants of this faithful and serviceable friend. His steward was charged to spend the whole amount on the dogs and to reserve nothing for himself; and the testator entered into the most minute particulars as to its expenditure. Feeling his end near, Mr. Berkeley desired that two arm chairs might be brought to his bedside, and his four dogs seated on them, received their last caresses, which he returned with the best of his failing strength, and died in their paws.

By an article in his will he ordered that the busts of his four dogs, descendants of the dog who saved his life, should be carved in stone and placed at the four corners of his tomb.

A Wealthy Cat

In 1892 a Paris lady left ten thousand francs to her cat. On its death, the money was to be spent on elementary schools. Recently, the death of the cat caused the money to divert to the district governing body for this purpose.

Cat, named in Will, Dead

In the will of Mrs. Sarah Titus Zabriskie, filed for probate at Newport early in September, 1910, provision was made for “Whiskers,” a cat that had been Mrs. Zabriskie’s pet for many years. It was provided that if Mrs. Zabriskie’s daughter, who was chief beneficiary, died before “Whiskers” passed away, the cat was to be put to death painlessly by Dr. Thomas G. Sherwood, a veterinarian, of No. 107 West Thirty-seventh Street, New York.

Dr. Sherwood was not called upon, however. The animal was chloroformed a month before the will was filed. It appears “Whiskers” suffered from an incurable disease, contracted in earlier and happier years, and predeceased his mistress.

Cat and Dog Money

In a certain county in England, there is what is known as “cat and dog” money given to the poor, but which, in the first instance, was left for the support of cats and dogs. Then, too, there are the cow and bull benefactions in several English parishes, which have been left to provide cattle whose milk would go to the poor.

A Cat Menu

A remarkable will was that of a famous harpist of the seventeenth century, by name Madame Dupuis. So eccentric indeed was it considered that it gave occasion to a cause cÉlÈbre, and has been mentioned by various contemporary writers—among others, by Moncriff, by Mercier St. Leger and by Bayle. This testatrix died in 1677, and, if a rambling style of writing be any test of insanity, this lady ought assuredly to have been placed in durance. The document abounds in violent expressions and unchastened invective; while the singular mode of applying the very large property she has at her disposal, the vindictive retributions she conjures, and the exclamations and apostrophes into which she bursts at intervals, culminate in the final clause, which we translate faithfully as follows:

“Item: I desire my sister, Marie Bluteau, and my niece, Madame Calonge, to look to my cats. If both should survive me, thirty sous a week must be laid out upon them, in order that they may live well.

“They are to be served daily, in a clean and proper manner, with two meals of meat-soup, the same as we eat ourselves, but it is to be given them separately in two soup-plates. The bread is not to be cut up into the soup, but must be broken into squares about the size of a nut, otherwise they will refuse to eat it. A ration of meat, finely minced, is to be added to it; the whole is then to be mildly seasoned, put into a clean pan, covered close, and carefully simmered before it is dished up. If only one cat should survive, half the sum mentioned will suffice.

“Nicole-Pigeon is to take charge of my two cats, and to be very careful of them. Madame Calonge is to visit them three times a week.”

A Cats’ Home

A Mr. Jonathan Jackson, of Columbus, Ohio, died some thirty years ago, leaving orders to his executors to erect a cats’ home, the plans and elevation of which he had drawn out with great care and thought. The building was to contain dormitories, a refectory, areas for conversation, grounds for exercise, and gently sloping roofs for climbing, with rat-holes for sport, an “auditorium” within which the inmates were to be assembled daily to listen to an accordion, which was to be played for an hour each day by an attendant, that instrument being the nearest approach to their natural voices. An infirmary, to which were to be attached a surgeon and three or four professed nurses, was to adjoin the establishment.

No mention seems to have been made of a chapel or a chaplain!

The testator gives as his reason for thus disposing of his property that “it is man’s duty as lord of animals to watch over and protect the lesser and feebler, even as God watches over and protects man.”

He does not, however, explain how it happens that on this principle he does not consider it his duty to protect rats from the “sporting” propensities of cats.

Lord Chesterfield’s Cat

Lord Chesterfield left a sum for the support of his favorite cat, so also did one Frederic Harper, who settled one hundred pounds, invested in three per cent annuities, on his “young black cat”; the interest to be paid to his housekeeper, Mrs. Hodges, as long as the cat should remain alive. It does not appear how he provided against the substitution of any supposititious black cat for his favorite, should she have died whether of neglect or otherwise.

A Premium on Pigmanship

A wealthy tradesman, M. Thomas Heviant, died at the village of CrÔne-sur-Marne in 1878. In his will he made a number of singular bequests, among which was the following, which is carried out at the annual fÊte of the village. He ordered that among the amusements should be instituted a race with pigs, the animals to be ridden either by men or boys. The sum of 2000 francs was set apart as the prize to the lucky rider of the winning pig. The prize was not to be handed over, however, except on the condition that the winner wore deep mourning for the deceased during two years after the competition. The municipality accepted the eccentric bequest, and these singular races have been held agreeably to the terms of the will.

3
CHARITY

A Perpetuity Involved

A certain gentleman of New York named Marshall had acquired a large fortune in the manufacture of cotton goods. The Lord had smiled upon him, and his wealth consequently loomed up in large proportions. He was justly proud of his material success, and, being childless and without kin on this side of the ocean, he resolved to perpetuate his name and commemorate that liberality towards charitable and religious objects, for which he had always been remarkable. His plan was to have his executors carry on his manufacturing business for the benefit of religious and charitable corporations. He left his manufacturing establishment to his executors in trust to carry on the same and divide the profits in certain proportions between the American Tract Society, the American Home Missionary Society and the American Bible Society, and the Marshall Infirmary, the latter being a hospital which he had founded. The court held, however, that there was a perpetuity involved, and directed that the estate be divided between the next of kin. The court held that the business of such religious societies was the printing of tracts and Bibles, and not the manufacture of cotton cloths. It took eight years and cost $50,000 to establish the legal meaning of the will, which was a very different meaning from that which the testator intended.

Wise Will of Peter Burns

For years to come some families of Clay County, Missouri, will have occasion to remember with gratitude the wise philanthropy of a sturdy pioneer, Peter B. Burns of Liberty, who died in July, 1910; the terms of his will have just been made public. On the death of the widow half the estate, which is valued at more than $40,000, is to go to Clay County to be administered by the County Court in loans, which are not to exceed $2000 to a single individual and to bear two per cent interest; are to be secured by a mortgage on the real estate; and are to be paid off at the rate of at least $100 a year. Thus ten families at a time will constantly be given a lift toward financial independence.

The plan is based on the sensible principle of helping men to help themselves. As the help is in the shape of a loan, to be repaid, it will pauperize no one. It will go to families of small means, and it will provide an incentive to people to save enough to take advantage of the assistance offered.

No Study before Breakfast

Countess Anna Maria Helena de Nouilles, a member of one of the historic families of France, has made a curious will which was proved in July, 1910.

She left her estate at Meads, Eastbourne, England, to found “St. Mary’s Orphanage,” laying down the following rules for the education of the girls:

“No competitive examinations, no study before breakfast, no study after 6 P.M., all lessons to be learned in the morning, no girl to work more than four and a half hours daily. No arithmetic, except the multiplication table for children under ten. No child with curvature of the spine to write more than five minutes a day, until thirteen. Each girl must be certified by two phrenologists as not deficient in conscientiousness and firmness. No child to be vaccinated.”

Weary of Reading the Will

Nearly a hundred years ago, the Reverend Dr. Van Bunschooten departed this life and entered upon his reward: by his last will and testament, he left a legacy of $20,000 to the Dutch Reformed Church of America; the gift was accepted by that body and very properly expended for church purposes.

The testator, doubtless, with a view to posthumous fame and remembrance, made the gift on the express condition that his will should be read at all the official sessions of the Church forever. The Church has ever since been reading this document at all its official meetings.

It appears that the testament is of considerable length and much dryness, and its reading has become an irksome task: the Church has recently appealed to the courts of New York to be released from the duty of further reading the will, and it is to be hoped that the proper tribunal will determine that sufficient fidelity and honor have been shown.

Will of Pinedo, the Portuguese Jew

This remarkable Israelite, well known in Amsterdam for his enormous wealth and liberal donations, died about the middle of the eighteenth century. His will, testifying to a noble and generous nature, and disposing in the most magnanimous and tolerant spirit of the very large fortune he had made, is to be found (in Schutt’s “Memorabilia Judaica,” lib. iv. cap. 18) as follows:

“I bequeath to the city of Amsterdam the sum of five ‘tons’ of gold.

“I lend to the said city for ten years, and without interest, the sum of a million and a half of florins.

“I give to every Christian church at Amsterdam and at the Hague the sum of 10,000 florins each, and to the church in the southern quarter of Amsterdam 20,000 florins.

“I give to each Christian orphanage in the two towns the sum of 10,000 crowns.

“I give to the poor of Amsterdam forty shiploads of peat.

“I give to the orphan who shall first quit the orphanage 1000 florins, and to the one who shall succeed him 600 florins.

“I give to the synagogue at Amsterdam two and a half ‘tons’ of gold.

“I give to the Portuguese orphanage 30,000 crowns.

“I lend to the Government at three per cent. interest, ten ‘tons’ of gold on condition that the interest shall be paid to the Jews domiciled at Jerusalem: the capital to belong to the Government in perpetuity.

“I give to the German synagogue 5000 florins.

“I give to my nephew Ovis thirty-one ‘tons’ of gold, with all my houses and appurtenances.

“I give to my widow ten ‘tons’ of gold.

“I give to my other relations in equal portions 10,000 crowns.

“I give to each of my neighbours who shall assist at my funeral 100 ducats.

“I give to every unmarried person of either sex who shall be present at my burial 100 florins, and to every Christian priest in Amsterdam and at the Hague 100 crowns, and to every sacristan 50 crowns.”

Charitable Light

John Wardall, of London, by will, dated 29th August, 1656, gave to the Grocers’ Company, a tenement called the White Bear, in Walbrook, to the intent that they should yearly, within thirty days after Michaelmas, pay to the churchwardens of St. Botolph, Billingsgate, £4 to provide a good and sufficient iron and glass lantern, with a candle, for the direction of passengers to go with more security to and from the waterside all night long; the same to be fixed at the northeast corner of the parish church of St. Botolph, from the Feast Day of St. Bartholomew to Lady-day; out of which sum £1 was to be paid to the sexton for taking care of the lantern.

Gratitude

Charles Jones, Esq., of Lincoln’s Inn, by will, dated 17th January, 1640, directed that an hospital should be built near Pullhelly for 12 poor men, and that his father first, his uncle next, and so their heirs, should fairly and justly manage and govern such hospital, which he had long resolved, and with the desire of his deceased wife, who was with his father, and their mother, his brother Griffith, his sister, his wife, himself, and other servants, mercifully preserved and brought to land in Pullhelly, from imminent and present danger of the seas by God’s unspeakable love and favor; and whereas likewise he in his younger years was miraculously, by God’s own hand, drawn and led from the house in Port thyn Llayn, Wales, that was instantly cast and thrown down by the moultringe of an hill near thereunto, and therein nine persons and Christians were killed by reason thereof; himself, a child of three or four years of age at the most, having newly entered the house, and in a moment returned, not thirty yards from the house, but it fell all to dust and rubbish; for these and many other of God’s great mercies and loving kindness unto him, he and his deceased wife had determined of this poor hospital; for the maintenance of which hospital to be erected, he devised forever certain lands, of £50 per annum, and ordained his brother, Robert Jones, his executor.

It appears by a Latin inscription in front of the almshouses, that the benevolent intentions of the founder were entirely frustrated during the troubles of the civil war, and that the present edifice was erected by his heir, William Price, Esq., of Rhiwlas, in the year 1760.

A Light for Night Travellers

John Cooke, of St. Michael, Crooked Lane, London, by will, dated 12th September, 1662, gave to the churchwardens and vestrymen of this parish £76, to be laid out to the most profit and advantage, for various uses, and, amongst them

To the parish clerk, on condition that he should weekly, on a Saturday, sweep and make clean the aisle of the church called Fishmongers’ Aisle, 6s. 8d.

For the maintenance of a lantern and candle, to be of eight in the pound at the least, to be kept and hanged out at the corner of St. Michael’s Lane, next Thames Street, from Michaelmas to Lady-day, between the hours of nine and ten o’clock at night, until the hours of four or five in the morning, for affording light to passengers going through Thames Street or St. Michael’s Lane, £1.

Beer for his Associates

In 1879 died at Berlin a singular character, a man of large property and a fervent follower of the sect of Gambrinus.

The Tageblatt states that he had made in his will some capricious dispositions as regarded his burial; so abnormal, indeed, as to call for the intervention of the police; one of his directions being that his friends were to take it in turns to roll after his hearse a barrel of beer, which they were afterwards to consume upon his grave.

He distributed his large fortune among divers charitable institutions; but to his will was appended a codicil which was not to be opened until a year after his death. This anniversary, adds the Tageblatt, occurred recently.

The codicil being now accessible reveals a decree creating a fund of ten thousand marks, the interest of which is to be expended in serving weekly a quarter of a tun of Bavarian beer to the frequenters of a brewery in the Prinzenstrasse, where the testator had been in the habit of spending his evenings regularly during many years—these persons being such as survived of his contemporaries. As soon as all shall be dead, the fund is to be transferred to the first foundling hospital that shall be founded in Berlin, the testator himself having been a foundling.

Travellers’ Rest

George Butler, of Coleshill, Warwickshire, by will, dated September 2, 1591, gave his house at the lower end of the town of Coleshill, called the almshouse, also a house and lands in Gilson, to the uses following, viz., that the rents thereof should be employed to keep the said almshouse in repair, and buy furniture when wanting; that the feoffees, or constables, with their consent, might lodge any poor travellers that should desire it in the said almshouse; that none should be suffered to lodge there more than one night, except great cause shown; that care be taken women and men lodge not near together; that some persons be permitted to dwell there rent free, to wash the house and furniture, and to take care of the poor lodgers; that the overplus of the rent be employed to some charitable use.

Poor Maimed Soldiers

Phillip Shelley, of London, by will, dated the 6th of September, 1603, gave certain lands in Ulkerthorpe, in the county of Derby, to the Company of Goldsmiths, in trust (amongst other matters), to pay £10 per annum forever towards the relief of poor maimed soldiers, which sum is paid generally to ten pensioners of Chelsea Hospital.

Tolerance

William Wilson, of Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, England, by his will, dated 15th of April, 1726, gave the sum of £100 South Sea Stock to the Chamber of the Corporation of Tewkesbury, upon trust, to permit the high bailiff for the time being to receive the dividends thereon, and dispose of the same, at his discretion, to poor persons of Tewkesbury, especially to such as should be visited with sickness or other calamitous accidents, without any regard to differences of political and religious opinions, the bailiff to account to the chamber for the disposal of the same, and to retain 10s. for his trouble.

A Republican Will

In August, 1874, MM. Nicolet and Colmet-d’Ange were employed to plead before the premiÈre chambre against the will of Adolphe-ThÉodore-Ange, du Laurens de la Barre.

The number of this gentleman’s names is in itself an eccentricity; his will was another. We need not cite the whole of it, but the following was the concluding clause:

“In case I should leave no grand-nephews, I bequeath my property, after the death of Madame Duhem and Mdlle. Verdun, to the three cities of Guingamp, Morlaix, and Lannion, on condition that the revenues of the same shall be employed to give marriage portions annually, and alternately, in each such city, to five young girls of small means.

“I desire that they shall begin by Guingamp and follow with the others in regular order.

“I further request the republican members of the conseil-gÉnÉral of the Finisterre, to the number of five—to the absolute exclusion of Legitimists, Orleanists, Imperialists, and above all of Clericals and Communards—to find five young girls whose parents, and who also themselves, hold the same opinions as myself. If at the conseil-gÉnÉral there should not be found the required number of members, those there are must call upon the municipal counsellors of the above-named towns, and if they should refuse to accept, on all the municipal counsellors.

“The Breton people is dominated, enchained by old prejudices; it must be liberated from its bondage.

“I believe in an unknown God whom I invoke daily, but not in a God of human creation.

“(Signed) Adolphe-ThÉodore-Ange, du Laurens de la Barre.

“Guingamp, 5th October, 1872.”

A Provision for Twins

Mr. and Mrs. Henry C. Mills, of Marblehead, Massachusetts, are the first claimants under a bequest made in the will of Hon. James J. H. Gregory, which provides that the income of $1000 shall be divided each year among the parents of twins born in Marblehead. The Mills twins were born July 10, 1910, and are boys.

The will, which was probated about a month after Mr. Gregory’s death in February, 1910, reads as follows:

“Having had my sympathies often aroused by reason of the extra burden and care entailed on loving mothers, poor in the things of earth, who have brought twins into the world, as an expression of that sympathy I leave in trust to my beloved town $1000, with the provision that the interest be divided on January first between all twins born in Marblehead during the previous year. In case no twins are born during a given year the interest shall be added to the principal.”

Dropping Money on a Tombstone

On Good Friday, in the Churchyard of St. Bartholomew the Great, Smithfield, after divine service, one of the clergymen drops twenty-one sixpences on a tombstone, to be picked up by as many poor people, widows having the preference. The will providing for this is lost, and the distribution is now made out of the parish funds. The bequest is said to date several hundreds of years back.

Charity Sermons to commemorate National Mercies

Luke Jackson, citizen and girdler, of London, by will, dated 26th of January, 1630, reciting that he was seized in fee of certain tithes at or near Horsepool, in the county of Leicester, being about the value of £20 per annum, devised the same to certain persons on trust, yearly, to pay the clear rents and profits thereof in manner following; that is to say, two equal third parts as followeth: 40s. thereof yearly to be given for two sermons to be preached in St. Peter’s church, in the town of Nottingham, on 28th of July and 5th of November, acknowledging God’s mercy, and giving thanks for the deliverance of this land and people at two several times from the Invincible Armada (as it was termed) in 1588, and from the Gunpowder Plot in 1605: and the residue of the said two-thirds to be distributed amongst the poor people in the parish of St. Peter, at the discretion of his five feoffees; and the other third part of the clear profits of the said tithes as followeth, viz., 40s. for two sermons to be preached in the church of Thornton, near Horsepool, on the two above mentioned days; and the residue to be distributed amongst the poor people in the parish of Thornton, at the discretion of his feoffees.

Encouragement for Maid-servants

John Cogan, of Canterbury, England, by his will, bearing date 27th of July, 1657, recited that he had lately purchased lands and tenements in the parishes of St. Mildred and St. Mary Castle, Canterbury, and in Thanington in Kent, of the yearly value of £35, which he hoped in ten years would improve in yearly value by £10, and which he intended to dispose of for the encouragement of maid-servants, to continue in service for six or seven years together; he therefore willed and devised the sum of five pounds apiece to any such three maid-servants as should, without compulsion, dwell with any master or mistress, not being their own kindred, within the city of Canterbury, for six or seven years together, without shifting their service; and he directed that such master or mistress should give a certificate of such service, and that the wages had not exceeded fifty shillings a year, to the mayor, recorder and three or more of the aldermen of the said city for the time being; and he further directed that the overplus, after keeping the said tenements in good repair, should be employed by the said mayor, recorder and three of the said ancient aldermen for the time being, in clothing six fatherless maiden children, from the age of six to twelve years, each to have a petticoat and waistcoat of colored kersey, one pair of shoes, and one pair of stockings, on Christmas Day; and that they should go through the city of Canterbury from parish to parish, as the said overplus would extend.

Bull Baiting

George Staverton, of Wokingham, Berks, England, by will, dated May, 1661, gave out of his Staines house a yearly sum of £6 to buy a bull, which bull he gave to the poor of Wokingham town and parish, being baited, and the gift money, hide, and offal to be sold and bestowed upon the poor children in stockings of the Welsh, and shoes.

Until 1823 the baiting of the animal took place yearly on the 21st of December, in the market-place of Wokingham. In that year the Corporation determined upon discontinuing such a proceeding, which has since accordingly been omitted.

Must attend Church

The last will and testament of Thomas Spackman, of Cliffe Pypard, Wilts, England, is as follows:

“June 5th, 1675.—I do charge my lands with twenty-one shillings by the year, and to continue for ever; viz., one shilling to the minister of the parish, to mind him of his duty in catechizing the children; twenty shillings to the poor of the parish yearly, to be given them at the church, viz.—five shillings on St. Thomas’s Day, five shillings on the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, five shillings on St. John the Baptist’s and five shillings on St. Matthew’s Day: my Will is, that twenty poor people do receive threepence a-piece, and that they be at the church at the beginning of prayers, or else to have no share; if the number be not twenty, then the remains to be given to those that are best deserving; and if they can, let them sing the 15th Psalm; now, if the minister be a good man, he will be careful to see this my Will performed, for the honour of the church, that at this day is almost destitute.”

The land charged with this payment is in the tithing of Broad Town, and the property of William Ruddle Brown, a farmer. The sum has been for many years distributed in bread.

Fancy for Color

Henry Greene, of Melbourne, Derbyshire, England, by will, dated 22d of December, 1679, gave to his sister, Catherine Greene, during her life, all his lands in Melbourne and Newton, and after her decease to others, in trust, upon condition that the said Catherine Greene should give four green waistcoats to four poor women every year, such four green waistcoats to be lined with green galloon lace, and to be delivered to the said poor women on or before the 21st of December yearly, that they might be worn on Christmas Day.

For Paupers

Valentine Goodman, of Hallaton, Leicestershire, England, by will, dated in 1684, bequeathed £800, to be laid out in land, and the profits thereof given to the “most indigent, poorest, aged, decrepid, miserablest paupers,” viz., six from Easton, four from Medbourn, four from Hallaton, and two from Blaston; and if any part of the money (was) employed for easing town levies, or not according to the intent of the testator, then he declared that the gift should cease, and the money be employed for the redemption of Turkish captives.

A Religious Task

Dr. Thomas White, of Newark, Nottinghamshire, England, Bishop of Peterborough, by his will, bearing date in 1690, gave to the poor of the parish of Newark £240, to be laid out in land, £10 of which rent he allotted to the poor yearly forever, and the surplusage, whatever it should be, to the rector, as a reward for his pains and fidelity in the distribution of the said £10 to the poor; and he directed that the distribution should be made yearly by the rector in the church porch, in the presence of the churchwardens or overseers, in the following manner, viz.: that it should be distributed the 14th of December to twenty poor families, or persons of forty years old each, by equal shares, reckoning husband and wife for one person, who should, before the receipt thereof, exactly and distinctly repeat the Lord’s Prayer, the Apostles’ Creed, and the Ten Commandments, without missing or changing one word therein. And if any man and wife should appear for a share in the said charity, it should not be a sufficient qualification for them that one of them made the exact rehearsal, but they should both make it, or else have no share at all in it. He also directed that no one should receive his charity twice, till all the poor of the parish should have received it once who should make the repetition aforesaid, that the advantage might spread as far as possible.

Attachment to a Family Name

John Nicholson of London, Stationer, by will, dated 28th of April, 1717, after bequeathing several specific legacies, gave all the residue of his estate in charity towards the support and maintenance of such poor persons of the Kingdom of England as should appear to be of the name of Nicholson, being Protestants; and he directed that it should be disposed of in the following manner, namely:

One hundred pounds a year to two such poor persons, men or women, of the name of Nicholson, towards their advancement in marriage; to each of them £50; always observing that no more than £50 be given to any one couple so marrying.

One hundred pounds per annum towards putting to apprentice such poor boys and girls of the name of Nicholson, or towards setting them up, as his trustees should think fit.

And one hundred pounds per annum towards the support and maintenance of such poor men and women of the name of Nicholson, as his trustees should direct; always observing that not more than £10 a year and not less than £5 a year should be given to any one person; the said sums to be paid to them at their own habitations.

He appointed William Nicholson, Lord Bishop of Carlisle; Mr. Nicholson, the Bishop’s son; and three other persons of the name of Nicholson, two of whom were resident in London, trustees, and left to them the entire management of this charity and appointed them his executors.

Bequest to pay Marriage Fees

Mr. Thomas Hatch, of Winkfield, Berks, England, by will, dated 3d of December, 1778, gave to the churchwardens of Winkfield £200 to be laid out in the public funds, the interest to be applied to the payment of the fees for such poor persons as are willing to marry, but cannot pay the expense.

After the payment of the marriage fees of such couples as claim it, the residue is distributed by the churchwardens in small sums of money and articles of clothing to such poor persons as they may think deserving.

Will leaving a Fund to endow a RosiÈre

By her will, dated 6th of December, 1870, a lady of Puteaux, Madame Jeanne Cartault, bequeathed to that parish the sum of fifteen thousand francs, the interest of which was to be employed every year in providing a marriage portion for the most deserving among the poor working girls, and was to be called the Cartault foundation. The gift only to be made over to the recipient on her marriage, and the administrator to pay the amount only on the wedding-day, and in presence of the registrar. The marriage to take place on or about the 17th of January, being the wedding-day of Madame Cartault.

A clause in the will provides that the firstborn of this marriage shall, if a boy, take the name of Edmond—that of M. Cartault, and, if a girl, that of Jeanne—being the name of the testatrix.

According to these directions, on the 29th of January, 1874, took place the crowning of the first RosiÈre of Puteaux, in conformity with the prescriptions of the will, and with it the donation of the amount of one year’s interest on the sum bequeathed—seven hundred and fifty francs.

The choice had fallen on a young woman of twenty-four, Mademoiselle EugÉnie Bouillaud. Her qualifications justified the selection. She was an orphan, and from the time she was ten years of age had worked for the support of her grandparents, who lived in extreme poverty. Her mother died when she was born, and her father was killed in trying to rescue a fellow-workman from a well into which he had fallen.

The ceremony was rendered picturesque by the arrangements made to honor the occasion, but for some reason every demonstration of a religious nature was excluded. An immense tent had been erected near the mayor’s house, decorated with flags and banners. The proceedings were opened with a piece of orchestral music, admirably executed by the Orpheonic band of the town. The mayor made a neat and appropriate speech, after which M. Laboulaye addressed the RosiÈre and the assembled spectators.

The concluding incident of the ceremony was the crowning of the young girl, whose quiet, modest demeanor well became her pale but interesting face. Her name was then inscribed on the virgin page of the Livre d’or des RosiÈres de Puteaux, and her autograph signature was written beneath it with a somewhat trembling hand.

To Promote Brotherly Love

Robert Halliday, of Eastcheap, London, by his will, dated 6th of May, 1491, gave estates in the parish of St. Leonard, Eastcheap, the rents to be applied to various purposes, and, amongst others, 5s. to the churchwardens yearly, either to make an entertainment among such persons of his home parish of St. Clement, who should be at variance with each other, in the week preceding Easter, to induce such persons to better neighborhood, and to beget brotherly love amongst them; or if none should be found in the said parish, then to make an entertainment with the said 5s. at the tavern amongst the honest parishioners of the said parish on the day of our Lord’s Supper, commonly called Shere Thursday, that they may pray more fervently for the souls of certain persons named in his will.

Drinking

Edward Cooper, of Slinfold, Sussex, England, by his will, dated 10th of February, 1621, gave 20s. a year out of lands called Whitbers, in Slinfold, 15s. thereof to be bestowed by the churchwardens and overseers upon a drinking, for the use of the poor of the parish yearly, at the feast day of the Purification of the Virgin, in as good sort as they could, and the other 5s. to drink withal themselves, for their labor and pains therein.

The land is now called South Whitbreads, and the owner of the property regularly pays the sum of £l yearly, which is distributed amongst the poor at Christmas by the churchwardens and overseers.

Encouragement to attend Divine Service

Thomas Walker, of St. James’s, Bristol, England, by his will, dated 25th of April, 1666, ordered as follows: “I give and bequeath to that poor parish of St. James the sum of £200, to purchase for ever the sum of £10 8s. 0d. a year for eight poor house-keepers that are known to live in the fear of God, and to come unto the church every Lord’s day, a six-penny loaf of bread every Sabbath day, after morning prayer, unto these eight poor house-keepers for ever; but for God’s sake let them be no drunkards nor common swearers—no, nor that do beg in the streets from door to door, but let them be quiet people that do desire to live in the fear of God. Pray let their bread be wheaten bread, and weight as it ought to be.”

Stormy Days

Thomas Williamson, of Castlerigg, Cumberland, England, by will, dated 14th of December, 1674, gave the sum of £20 to be laid out in land to be bestowed upon poor people, born within St. John’s Chapelry or Castlerigg, in mutton or veal, at Martinmas yearly, when flesh might be thought cheapest, to be by them pickled or hung up and dried, that they might have something to keep them within doors upon stormy days.

Snuff and Tobacco for the Sick

Dr. F. W. Cumming left six hundred pounds to the Royal Infirmary, Edinburgh, to provide poor patients, male and female, with snuff and tobacco, giving the following reason for his unusual bequest: “I know how to feel for the suffering of those, who in addition to the irksomeness of pain and the tedium of confinement, have to endure the privation of what long habit has rendered in a great degree a necessity of life.”

To toll the Bell

William Minta, of Great Gonerby, Lincolnshire, who died 8th of June, 1724, gave £5 to the poor of Gonerby, to be distributed in bread to sixteen aged people, on Good Friday, yearly, a “threepenny dole a piece,” and the clerk was “to toll the bell at three o’clock, and to read the Epistle and Gospel, and sing the Lamentation of a Sinner,” and to have one shilling reward.

Christmas Festivities

William Taylor, of Shropshire, England, by will, dated 6th of February, 1735, directed that Elizabeth Leigh, then owner, and the persons who subsequently should be owners of his two freehold houses, &c., situate in High Street, in the parish of St. Leonard, should yearly, for ever, on the 26th of December, give and provide a good and wholesome dinner for the poor persons, almshouse women, inhabiting the almshouse belonging to the parish of St. Leonard, in such manner as of late years has been provided for them on that day by the testator and his late brother; and they to be so entertained in the most convenient part of the house that fronted the street; and upon every default his Will was, and he ordered the sum of £10 to be paid to, and equally divided amongst, such poor persons, and the same to be chargeable upon the said houses, &c.

Gratitude for being preserved in a Battle

Ezekiel Nash, an Englishman, of Bristol, St. James’, for a memorial of his thankfulness to Almighty God for his wonderful preservation in an engagement with a French frigate, March the 8th, 1762, gave by will, dated 27th of March, 1800, the sum of £100, to the churchwardens and overseers for the time being of such parish as he should be buried in, upon trust, to invest the same and apply the interest annually in manner following, viz., to the minister of the same parish, for preaching a sermon yearly, on the 8th of March, forever, one guinea; to the clerk and sexton for their attendance, 5s. each; the residue in the purchase of bread, to be distributed on the 8th of March, and the six Sundays next following, among such poor persons of the parish whom the minister, churchwardens and overseers should think fit objects to receive the same, not receiving alms or other charity.

The Gratitude of a Member of Parliament

Henry Archer, Esq., of Hale, England, in the county of Southampton, by will, dated the 5th of November, 1764, gave the sum of £500 to the poor of the borough of Warwick, in grateful remembrance of the very great honor conferred on him by the said borough (which he represented in Parliament) for thirty years and upwards, to be disposed of, and managed to the best advantage of the said poor by his brother Lord Archer, the Earl of Warwick, and Matthew Wise, Esq., and by the respective vicars, churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the parishes of St. Mary and St. Nicholas, in the said borough, for the time being.

The interest is employed in purchasing coals in the summer, and selling them to the poor at a reduced price in winter.

In Commemoration of John Bunyan

Samuel Whitbread, Esq., of Bedford, England, by will, dated the 13th of July, 1795, gave to the trustees of the “Old Meeting,” out of respect to the memory of John Bunyan, and for the relief of the poor of the congregation, five hundred pounds, to be laid out by his executors in the Three Per Cent. Consols, and the dividends to be annually applied in giving bread to the poor in quartern loaves every Sabbath morning, from October to May.

After the death of Mr. Whitbread, the sum of £500, instead of being laid out in stock, was, at the request of his son, the late Samuel Whitbread, Esq., allowed to remain in his hands on the security of his bond, conditioned for the investment of £980 Three Per Cent. Consols, being so much stock as the £500 would then purchase.

A bond, subject to the same condition, was executed about 1819 by William Henry Whitbread, Esq., eldest son of the late Samuel Whitbread, in lieu of the former bond.

The interest payable on the bond amounts to £29 8s. per annum, which is received regularly by the trustees of the Old Meeting, and is laid out by them in the purchase of quartern loaves, which are distributed at the meeting-house every Sabbath day, from May to October, among such poor persons of the congregation as the trustees select.

Dressing a Grave with Flowers

William Benson Earle, Esq., of Grateley, Hampshire, England, who died in 1796, gave three hundred guineas to the rector, churchwardens, and overseers of Grateley, in trust, to invest the same in their joint names, and expend half the interest thereof at Christmas, and the other half at Easter, in the purchase of the best ox-beef and cheese, together with potatoes or peas, or both, to be distributed in just proportions, at their discretion, among the poorest families in that parish, but nowhere else. And he requested that one guinea of the annual interest should be given yearly to the clerk of the parish, so long as he should cleanse and repair with flowers in the different seasons, as had before been done, the bed over the remains of Dame Joanna Elton, in the churchyard of Grateley.

Bread for the Poor

The Rev. Mr. Pitt, an English clergyman, directed sixty penny loaves to be given to the poor of St. Botolph’s, Bishopsgate, yearly, on Whit Sunday, by eight o’clock in the morning, upon his tomb, in the burying-ground, in Old Bethlem.

Bluecoat Boys and Packets of Raisins

In accordance with the will of Peter Symonds, dated 1586, sixty of the younger boys of Christ’s Hospital, London, attend divine service at the Church of Allhallows, Lombard-street, on Good Friday, and are presented each with a new penny, a bun, and a packet of raisins.

A Fixed Price for Corn and Wine

A citizen of Berne, Switzerland, left this unusual will:

“Being anxious for my fellow-citizens of Berne (who have often suffered by dearth of corn and wine), my Will is that, by the permission of Providence, they shall never for the future suffer again under the like calamity, to which end and purpose I give my estate, real and personal, to the Senate of Berne, in trust for the people; that is to say, that they receive the produce of my estate till it shall come to the sum of (suppose two thousand pounds); that then they shall lay out the two thousand pounds in building a town house, according to a plan by me left; the lower story whereof to consist of large vaults or repositories for wine; the story above I direct to be formed into a piazza, for such persons as shall come to the market at Berne for disposing of their goods free from the injuries of the weather; above that I direct a council chamber to be erected for a committee of the Senate to meet in from time to time to adjust my accounts, and to direct such things as may be necessary for the charity; and above the council chamber as many floors for granaries as can be conveniently raised, to deposit a quantity of corn for the use of the people whenever they shall have occasion for it. And when this building shall be erected, and the expense of it discharged, I direct the Senate of Berne to receive the produce of my estate till the same shall amount to the sum (suppose of two thousand pounds); and when the price of corn shall be under the mean rate of the last ten years, one fourth part, they shall then lay out one thousand pounds in corn, and stow it in my granaries, and the same in wine, when under one fourth of the mean rate of the last ten years; and my Will is that none of the said corn or wine shall be sold until the price of corn and wine shall exceed at the common market one fourth of the mean rate for the last ten years; and then every citizen of Berne shall demand daily (and proportionally weekly) as many pounds of wheat and as many pints of wine as he has mouths in his family to consume, and no more, and that for the same he pay ready money after the mean rate that it has been at for the last ten years past, a due proportion being allowed for waste, and that to be settled by the Senate; and that each householder shall be so supplied as long as the price of corn and wine shall continue above the rate of one fourth more than the mean rate; and whatsoever increase shall be made of the capital, it shall be laid out under the same restrictions, in adding to the stock of corn and wine; which, under the blessing of God, will, I hope, in a certain time reduce these two necessary articles of life to very near a fixed price, to the glory of God and the benefit of the poor.”

This legacy has existed about 300 years, and had the desired effect at Berne, and a will on the same principle has been made for purchasing fuel for the poor of Kingston-on-Thames, England.

Fish for the Poor in Lent

John Thake, of Clavering, Essex, England, by will, dated 13th of June, 1537, gave to Robert Cockerell and his heirs his house and lands called Valence, upon condition that they should forever, yearly, on Friday, the first week in Lent, give to poor people of Clavering one barrel of white herrings and a cade of red herrings (a cade is about half a barrel), always to be given by the oversight of the churchwardens and the tenants and occupiers of the lordship and parsonage of Clavering.

The owner of the farm called Valence, regularly sends to the house of the parish clerk, in Lent, a barrel of red herrings and a barrel of white, which are distributed in the church by the parish clerk and sexton, four to each married couple, two to each widow and widower, and one to each child.

Cow Charity

James Goodaker, of Woodchurch, Cheshire, England, in 1525, left a fund by will to buy twenty yoke of bullocks, which were subsequently replaced by cows, and given to the poor of Woodchurch parish: every parishioner that had a cow or cows paying yearly for each to the overseers the sum of 2s. 8d. every Friday before Whitsunday, which hire was to be a stock for the benefit of the poor forever.

The parish of Woodchurch includes ten townships, from each of which a trustee of the cow property is elected, whose duty it is to see that the animals are properly taken care of, and those persons are termed governors of the cows. There is an annual meeting, on which occasion the cows are produced and examined.

Turkeys for Parishioners

In 1691, John Hall left to the Weavers’ Company a dwelling-house, with instructions to pay 10s. per annum to the churchwardens of St. Clement, Eastcheap, to provide on the Thursday night before Easter two turkeys for the parishioners, on the occasion of their annual reconciling or love-feast (settlement of quarrels or disputes).

Bread, Beer, Beef, and Broth

John Balliston, of St. Giles’s, Norwich, by will, dated 17th of October, 1584, devised three tenements in St. Giles’s next the Gates to certain persons, upon condition that they should make distribution to the poor in manner following, viz. that in the week before Christmas, the week before Michaelmas, and the week after Easter, in the church of St. Giles, the minister should request the poor people, all that should receive or have need of alms, to come to church, and request them to pray for the preservation of the Prince, &c.; that the poor should place themselves four and four together, all that should be above the age of eleven years, and that every four of them should have set before them a two-penny wheat loaf, a gallon of best beer, and four pounds of beef and broth; that the minister should have fourpence for his pains on each of the three days.

The rent of £2 a year is paid to the parish for the premises, which, with other charities, is laid out in the purchase of coals.

Halfpenny Bread Charity

Robert Grainger of Godmanchester, Huntingdonshire, by his will, dated 10th of October, 1578, gave and appointed as much bread as could be made of a coomb of wheat, to be made into halfpenny loaves, and to be distributed among the poor of Godmanchester by the churchwardens, to be charged on his mansion house in Godmanchester.

The present owner of the house pays the value of four bushels of wheat, according to the average price of wheat at Huntingdon market, on the Saturday before Good Friday, to a baker, for supplying the bread, which is distributed on Good Friday.

Cuttings of Fish

Robert Harding, of London, by will, dated 20th of November, 1568, gave to the Company of Fishmongers an annuity of £3 6s. 8d. issuing out of his lands and tenements in Pudding Lane; and Simon Harding, his son, by deed, 7th of September, 1576, confirmed the same; to hold the said annuity to the wardens and commonalty and their successors, to the intent that they should pay in the Lent season £3, that is, in New Fish Street 30s. and in Old Fish Street 30s., to the use of the poor inhabiters and artificers compelled by necessity to repair thither, to buy the cuttings of fish and the refuse of fish; the residue to remain to the wardens for their labors in this behalf.

There being no poor persons of the description mentioned in the will, the annuity has been added to the fund distributed to the half-yearly poor at Christmas.

Bequest of White Peas

John Huntingtdon, of Sawston, Cambridgeshire, England, by will, dated 4th of August, 1554, devised lands and tenements to Joice his wife, and his heirs, upon condition that his heirs should yearly forever sow two acres of land, lying together in Linton field, with white peas, one coomb to be yearly bestowed upon each acre, for the relief of the people of Sawston.

Two acres, the property of Richard Huddlestone, Esq., the lord of the several manors in the parish, are annually sowed with white peas, as directed by the will, which are gathered green on a day fixed by the occupier of the land, by all the poor indiscriminately, when a complete scene of scramble and confusion ensues, attended with occasional conflicts.

Milk Tribute

Edmund Porter of Alresford, Middlesex, by will, dated 27th of May, 1558, directed that John Porter should have a house called Knapps, with the appurtenances, church fences, and caprons (which comprised thirty-one acres of land), to him and his heirs, upon condition that they should give forever the morning milk of two able milk beasts to the poor people of this parish, every Sunday yearly, from Whitsunday to Michaelmas, 3s. 4d. on Good Friday, and a like sum on Christmas Day.

This milk tribute has subsequently been commuted for a money payment, which is distributed in bread amongst the poor.

4
BURIAL

A Primitive Belief

There seems to have been a wide-spread primitive belief that the spirit of the departed could not rest in peace unless the obsequies were duly performed. Thus the ghost of Patroclus appeared to Achilles to request that his body might be buried in order that he might pass the gates of Hades. This belief was apparently fostered by the doctrine of the resurrection of the body.

Veteran’s Request

Robert Riedel, of Detroit, Michigan, died in June, 1910. He had fought through the Franco-Prussian War. By the terms of his will, he left to Detroit survivors of his old company, fifteen dollars with which to buy beer after they had marched to his funeral. It is said the purchase was made and duly drunk.

His Heart to be sent Home

There was filed in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on September 24th, 1910, the will of Count Julian S. De Ovies, former Chilian Consul in Pittsburgh. He left his entire estate to his wife, Minnie, his son, Rev. Raimundo B. De Ovies, and his daughter, Edith Manselea De Ovies. One curious sentence in the will reads:

“I request that my body be cremated and my heart be sent, according to family custom, to the chapel of Santa Maria, in Luanco, Conbecejo de Gozon, Province of Austria, Spain.”

Wished a Perpendicular Grave

A nobleman of the house of Du ChÂtelet, who died about 1280, left in his will a singular provision. He desired that one of the pillars in the church of NeufchÂteau should be hollowed out and his body placed in it on its feet, “in order,” says he, “that the vulgar may not walk about upon me.” In a very different spirit was the following will.

Will of Guillaume de Champlitte

This worthy was Sire de Pontailler and de Talmai, Viscomte de Dijon, and descended from Guillaume de Champlitte II., Viscomte de Dijon, founder of the Priory of St. Marie de Pontailler, of the order “du Val des Ecoliers.” Shortly before his death in 1282, he made a will, desiring that he might be interred wearing the habit of a cordelier, and laid upon some litter. He further ordered there should be but four “chandailles,” i.e. candles, tapers, or torches employed at his funeral. He requested also that his body should be placed under the porch of the church of the Priory of Pontailler, that passers-by might walk over it. His desire was to be laid near his father, who had likewise caused himself to be buried under the porch.

Buried in Cambric

Lately, at Taunton, far advanced in years, Mrs. Mary Davis, an eccentric character, died. In her will she ordered that the expenses of her funeral should not exceed $1500, but that she should be buried in cambric, and that her coffin should be made of mahogany.

Bequeathed him Funeral Expenses

Mrs. Mary Thomas Piper, a wealthy widow of Kansas City, died in 1910. To Rollins Bingham, a nephew, she left $250 to be held in trust and used only for his funeral expenses. It appears that the conduct and habits of the nephew had not been pleasing to the testatrix, and she adopted this weird way of revenging herself upon one who had formerly been a favorite kinsman, but had subsequently incurred her displeasure.

This sum of $250 was left in trust in the hands of her executor to be held until the death of the nephew, and then applied to give him proper burial.

Rollins Bingham was a newspaper writer of Kansas City, Missouri, and his father was General George C. Bingham, a distinguished Missouri artist, who painted the well-known pictures, “General Order No. 11” and the “County Election.” He died quite recently, shortly after the above-mentioned will was probated, and the legacy at which he scoffed was used for the purpose named.

To induce People to Pray

The will of Master Robert Toste, Provost of the Collegiate Church of Wingham, dated 17th of August, 1457, recites: “My body to be buried on the uppermost step, on the north part of the high altar, where the Gospel is read in the choir on holidays in Wingham. I Will that a marble stone be laid over me, with an inscription, to induce people to pray for my soul. I bequeath part of my books to the new College of All Souls, founded by Archbishop Chicheley, part to University College, and part to the University Library of Oxford.”

Buried in an Old Chest

The Rev. Luke Imber, of Christchurch, Hants, England, one of his Majesty’s Justices of the Peace for that county, who, at the age of eighty-three, married a country girl of thirteen, desired in his will that he might be buried in an old chest which he had for some time kept by him for that purpose, and that the bearers should have each of them a pair of tanned leather gloves and a new pair of shoes, which were given accordingly.

Bribing the Children

Mr. Tuke, of Wath, near Rotherham, England, who died in 1810, bequeathed one penny to every child that attended his funeral (there came from 600 to 700); 1s. to every poor woman in Wath; 10s. 6d. to the ringers to ring a peal of grandbobs, which was to strike off whilst they were putting him into his grave; to an old woman who had for eleven years tucked him up in bed, £1 1s. per annum; to his natural daughter, £4 4s. per annum; to his old and faithful servant, Joseph Pitt, £21 per annum; forty dozen penny loaves to be thrown down from the church leads on Christmas Day forever. Two handsome brass chandeliers were also bequeathed to the church, and £20 for a new set of chimes.

Hand to be Cut Off

Mysterious directions in wills are sometimes to be met with which only a knowledge of the inner family history can explain; such as the direction in the will of the late Countess of Loudoun, the half-sister of the last Marquis of Hastings: “After my death I direct my right hand to be cut off, and buried in Donnington Park, at the bend of the hill towards the Trent, with this mottoe over it, ‘I byde my tyme.’” This direction was faithfully carried out by the lady’s husband, and the monument can now be seen in Donnington Park, in England.

An Epitaph

There was a certain missionary who was killed in India by an attendant. His epitaph reads:

Two Wives “Seven Foot” in Length

The will of John Wilcocks, of Chipping, Wycomb, England, 5th July, 1506. “My body to be buried in the Church of All Hallondon on Wye, before the rood. To the repair of our Lady’s Chapel of my grant xxiiis. ivd., I Will that my executors pay the charge of new glazing the window in the said Chapel; also I Will that an obit be kept yearly; I Will that my executors buy a marble stone to lay on my grave, with the picture of my two wives of vii foot in length, the stone mentioning her sons Thomas and Michael Wilcocks. I appoint Walter, my son, my executor, and also Robert Ashebrooke and Robert Brampton, priests, and John Aley, my executors.”

Wanted no Mourning

Theodore James Ralli, of Paris, an artist, who died at Lausanne, Switzerland, on September 26th, 1909, left personal estate in the United Kingdom valued at £8055.

The testator left to his daughter, Ina, in addition to her compulsory portion in accordance with the law of France, his automobile and the contents of his studio not otherwise bequeathed; a sum of 5000 fr. to his friend, Mr. Hawkins; 15,000 fr. to the SociÉtÉ des Artistes FranÇais, the income from which is to be awarded annually as a prize to be known as The Theodore Ralli Prize; to the Fine Arts Museum in Athens, all pictures of Greek subjects and framed studies in his studio; 5000 fr. to his model if she should still be in his service at the time of his death; and the residue of his property to his brothers, Spiridon and Manati, for life, with remainder to his daughter Ina.

Appended to the will is a letter expressing his wishes in the following manner: “Let me be placed in my coffin as quickly as possible after my death, and let nobody outside the household be admitted to my death chamber before I am placed in my coffin. In a word, I do not wish anybody to attend through curiosity to see how I look. Let no photographs be made of my corpse, and let me be buried as soon as possible. For the love of God, do not weep for me. I have lived a life happy enough. The aim of my life was painting, and I gave it all of which I was capable. I might have lived twenty years more, but I could not have progressed any more, so what was the good of it? And how content I should be if no one wore any marks of mourning for me. I always had a horror of it. So, if you cannot do otherwise, wear the least of it possible.”

Ashes in a Golden Receptacle

Carl Schumann, a pedlar who died in May, 1910, at the Home for the Aged in Cincinnati, Ohio, directed that his body be cremated and the ashes tossed to the winds. The will also bequeathed the sum of Fifty Dollars to the Herwegh Maennerchor Society, with instructions that after the cremation the members spend the money having a good time.

The ceremony took place at the crematory at two o’clock in the afternoon, and was conducted by Mr. A. Goldstein, the leader of the Herwegh Maennerchor. While the body was being consumed, the society sang two German songs which were Schumann’s favorites.

When the body was reduced to ashes, they were gathered and placed in a golden receptacle, and as the final words were spoken, they were tossed into the air by Mr. R. Schueschner. The society then began the celebration.

Directions for Cremation

In these days cremation is recognized as a good and lawful way of disposing of our remains; but so late as 1855 it was not so, for we find Mr. William Kinsett, of London, in his will proved in October of that year, stating that, “believing in the impolicy of interring the dead amidst the living, and as an example to others, I give my body, four days after death, to the directors of the Imperial Gas Company, London, to be placed in one of their retorts and consumed to ashes, and that they be paid ten pounds by my executors for the trouble this act will impose upon them for so doing. Should a defence of fanaticism and superstition prevent their granting this my request, then my executors must submit to have my remains buried, in the plainest manner possible, in my family grave in St. John’s Wood Cemetery, to assist in poisoning the living in that neighbourhood.”

Some time after this the matter was frequently discussed in the papers, and public opinion grew slowly in favor of the practice. But it seemed to have been generally doubted whether such a method was in accordance with law and the words in the Church Service, “Earth to earth,” as in 1867 we find a testator directing his nephews to cause his body to be burned “if that can be legally done.” This testamentary wish to be cremated is not confined to recent times, and there seems in the 18th century to have been no difficulty in executors carrying out the directions in this respect in the wills under which they acted. In Dodsley’s “Annual Register” for 1769, under date of Sept. 26, there appears the following statement: “Last night the will of Mrs. Pratt, a widow lady, who lately died at her house in George Street, Hanover Square, was punctually fulfilled by the burning of her body to ashes in her grave in the new burying-ground adjoining to Tyburn turnpike.”

Coffin covered with Calico

Judge E. Y. Terral, of Cameron, Texas, died in August, 1910. His estate was valued at eight thousand dollars. By his will, he directed that no funeral services be had over his body, that no printed notices of his death be issued, that he be buried in a coffin made from rough pine plank covered with black calico and carried in a wagon or hack to the cemetery, and that no marble slab be erected at his grave.

Cards and Wine at his Funeral

A Frenchman, who was an enthusiastic card player, left to certain of his card-playing friends a legacy of considerable size on condition that, after placing a deck of cards inside his coffin with his body, they should carry him to the grave and should stop on the way to drink a glass of wine at a small saloon, where he had passed “so many agreeable evenings at piquet.”

Will of the Sieur Boby

An attempt to invalidate this will was made by the heirs of the testator seven years after his death, but the court pronounced in its favor. It is dated 1845.

It certainly exhibits many singularities, and there was no contesting the fact that the testator, who died at the age of ninety-six, had been remarkable for his eccentricities for many years. He had at one time possessed a fortune of about two and a half million dollars, and at his death left no more than $15,000; moreover, he had been placed under tutelage during the three last years of his life.

Several wills were found after his death, and the singularity of some of the clauses formed a plea of imbecility on the part of those who had expected to inherit his fortune.

One of these was a legacy to an old priest, to whom, although he had in his collection many paintings of sacred subjects, he bequeathed a “Cupid nestling in a bouquet of roses” to remind him, as he said, of his youthful days.

Towards the close of his life he manifested what is in France technically known as an obituary monomania, appearing entirely preoccupied with his death, and what was to become of his remains. On this subject he expressed himself thus:

“Eight-and-forty hours after my decease I desire that a post-mortem examination be made; that my heart be taken out and placed in an urn, which shall be intrusted to M. Baudoin (the undertaker). In conformity with an arrangement between him and myself, my heart is to be conveyed to a mausoleum in the department of La Mayenne, and there to be deposited as agreed.”

His epitaph was written out, and in this he had allowed himself considerable margin, as he fixed the date of his death forty-five years later than it actually occurred.

The letters of announcement were all prepared:

“M. et Madame Lappey ont l’honneur de vous faire part de la perte douloureuse qu’ils viennent de faire, dans la personne de M. Boby, dÉcÉdÉ en sa demeure rue de Louvois 10. Les convoi, service et enterrement auront lieu le ... 1890, À midi trÈs prÉcis À Saint Roch.”

According to this date he would have been one hundred and forty.

Heart and Brains Bequeathed

Dr. Ellerby died in London in February, 1827. He was a member of the Society of Friends. He passed for being a very eccentric character, and all his habits bore the stamp of originality. In his will are to be found some singular clauses, among them the following:

“Item: I desire that immediately after my death my body shall be carried to the Anatomical Museum in Aldersgate Street, and shall be there dissected by Drs. Lawrence, Tyrell, and Wardrop, in order that the cause of my malady may be well understood.

“Item: I bequeath my heart to Mr. W., anatomist; my lungs to Mr. R.; and my brains to Mr. F., in order that they may preserve them from decomposition; and I declare that if these gentlemen shall fail faithfully to execute these my last wishes in this respect I will come—if it should be by any means possible—and torment them until they shall comply.”

This threat did not much alarm the above-named parties, for it appears that they unhesitatingly renounced their several legacies.

The Earth needed for Corn

John W. Wallace, of Brooklyn, New York, died on the 28th day of December, 1909; his will contained the following novel provisions, which it is reported were literally carried out:

“I direct that my body be placed in a pine box not to cost more than five dollars; placed in an express wagon and taken to a crematory; that after cremation, the ashes shall be scattered in a field. The entire cost of the disposal of my body is not to exceed fifty dollars. My reason is, that I believe a man gets out of life all that he is entitled to, according to the amount of brain and energy he puts into it, and when he dies, should not occupy ground that may be needed for highways, or for planting corn, or for any other purpose that future generations may have for it. I believe that when I die my money, if I have any, should go to those dependent upon me, and not into expensive coffins and flowers.”

Took no Chances

A horror of being buried alive so haunted Mr. R. of Chicago that on his death he left minute instructions in his will to make such a fate quite impossible in his case. His body was not to be fastened up in his coffin till thirty days after his funeral, and the vault in which the body was placed was to be kept lighted and its doors left unlocked. Provision was also made for the employment of two men—trusted employees of the deceased—who were to guard the entrance, one by day and the other by night.

Her Carriages burned and Horses Shot

Quite a number of men, both Americans and Englishmen, who have spent a great part of their lives in hunting, have wished to be buried in their hunting dress, and this desire has been shared by at least one woman. An eccentric Welsh lady, who lived at a small place called Llanrug, was buried there in 1895 in accordance with the provisions of her will, which was in keeping with the local estimate of her character. She wished to be buried in her foxhunting clothes. The rest of her clothes and her carriages were to be burned on the day of her funeral, and all her horses—six in number, varying in value from £60 to £90 each—were to be shot on the day following the funeral. The remainder of her real and personal property to the value of £90,000 was left to her “dear husband,”—a former laborer on her estate, with whom some years previously she had, on her own suggestion, contracted a marriage,—provided that he strictly and literally carried out all the orders expressed in her will.

Funeral cost Six Francs

Some very rich men during their lives seem to enjoy the luxury of preparing at great expense the mausoleums they wish to occupy after death. M. Lalanne, a wealthy Parisian, went to the other extreme. He had a horror of anything like ostentatious funerals, and after bequeathing over a million francs to the various public institutions of his native city, he directed that his body be buried as cheaply as possible—in fact, like that of a pauper. A shabby one-horse vehicle conveyed his body to the fosse commune (the Potter’s Field), and the total cost of the funeral was only six francs, that being the charge for the cheapest kind of funeral under the French system, in which the undertaker’s business is a government monopoly.

A Woman Hater

Altogether unique was the whim of a rich old bachelor, who, having endured much from “attempts made by my family to put me under the yoke of matrimony,” conceived and nursed such an antipathy to the fair sex as to impose upon his executors the duty of carrying out what is probably the most ungallant provision ever contained in a will. The words are as follows: “I beg that my executors will see that I am buried where there is no woman interred, either to the right or to the left of me. Should this not be practicable in the ordinary course of things, I direct that they purchase three graves, and bury me in the middle one of the three, leaving the two others unoccupied.”

With the Saints on Bardsey Island

The late Lord Newborough, an Englishman, made the following curious provision in his will: he gave most explicit directions that, after a certain period had elapsed, his body was to be exhumed and reinterred in Bardsey Island. This island, it will be remembered, lies to the north of Cardigan Bay, and it is reputed to have had no fewer than 20,000 saints buried in its soil.

With Both Wives

Another individual desired to be buried in the space between the graves of his first and second wives; there are numerous instances of such an adjustment in American cemeteries, and wills are not uncommon which provide for such last resting places.

Too Modest for Vivisection

The Duchess of Northumberland, widow of the Protector, concluded her will as follows:

“In nowise let me be opened after I am dead; I have not used to be very bold before women, much more would I be loth to come into the hands of any living man, be he physician or surgeon.”

The very reverse, we may remark, of the instructions given by Katherine of Aragon on her deathbed.

Wishes of an Infidel

In one of the wildest gorges of the Blue Ridge in western North Carolina, there lived, a few years ago, a man who was a violent infidel; when he died, it was discovered that in his will he directed that he should be buried on the summit of one of the loftiest peaks of the Blue Ridge, and that his epitaph should disclose that he died reviling Christianity. Instead of carrying out his wishes, his relatives buried him in a Christian cemetery, and on the spot where he desired to be buried, placed a large white cross.

Will of John Fane

John Fane, of Tunbridge, England, died April 6, 1488; his will runs:

“My body to be buried in the church of SS. Peter and Paul, of Tunbridge.... To the prior and convent of Tunbridge, to pray for my soul, xx s., to the high altar of the church of Tunbridge, xx s.; to the structure of the rood-loft thereof, v marks.... To Humphrey Fane, my brother’s son, a house in fee simple, with a garden at the town’s end of Tunbridge.”

Will of Bakhuysen the Painter

Bakhuysen, born at Emden, in 1631, died at Amsterdam, in 1709, was not only a celebrated painter, but a skilful engraver, and a not inelegant poet. There appears to have been a great fund of gayety in his character, and this cheerfulness did not forsake him even in his old age, although he suffered from a lingering disease. Finding his end approaching, he ordered some of the best possible wine to be bought, and, having had it bottled, sealed the corks with his seal; he then placed in a purse seventy-eight gold coins, having lived that number of years, and by his will he invited the same number of friends—each of whom he named—to his funeral, begging them to accept his money and drink his wine with the same cordiality with which he offered it. We should mention that it is the custom in Amsterdam to present a glass of wine to guests attending at a funeral.

Will of Heemskirk

Another Dutch painter, Martin Heemskirk, left by his will a sum to provide annually a dowry for a young girl from his native village, on condition that, on the day of the wedding, the bride and bridegroom should come and dance with the wedding-guests upon his grave. Guy Patin relates this anecdote as having occurred about the middle of the seventeenth century, and declares that the testator’s prescription was faithfully carried out as long as the foundation lasted.

Will of FranÇois, Duc De Bretagne

In the will of FranÇois, first duke of Brittany, drawn up at Vannes, January 22, 1449, occurs a curious clause relating to the foundations of certain masses, and particularly the mode in which the bells were to be rung for them:

“ ... The largest bell (sain) of the said monastery (moustier) to be rung by twelve strokes (gobetiex); one stroke distant from the other by the space commonly occupied in saying an Ave Maria, and the whole time of ringing to be equivalent to the time it may take to recite a pater, a credo, and a miserere; and for this foundation we have appointed to the said moustier a revenue of CC livres.”

Equally curious, and very similarly expressed, are the wills of Pierre II., Duke of Brittany, September 5, 1457; MarguÉrite de Bretagne, September 22, 1469; Ysabeau of Scotland, Duke of Brittany, November 16, 1482; FranÇois II., Duke of Brittany, September 2, 1488. For these and others consult the works of BarnabÉ Brisson, 1585-1731.

In the Shadow of an Obelisk

An individual desired post-mortem honors in this wise: “I desire to be buried beneath the shadow of an obelisk, the style of which has been taken from ancient Egyptian civilization. I saw these wonderful monolith obelisks in Egypt, sat in their shade and sighed to have one for my monument in my far-off home in the New World.” On this obelisk the following inscription was directed to be placed:

Will of the Duchess of Kingston

Elizabeth Chudleigh, Duchess of Kingston, was celebrated for her beauty, her eccentricities, her taste for show and dissipation, and her extraordinary propensity to indulge in masculine sports and exercises, for her travels in Italy, Germany, and Russia, and her adventures generally. She passed many years in Paris, where she resided in the Rue Coq-HÉron, and died there 28th August, 1788.

Her will is altogether in accordance with the remarkable features of her character. As she was much attached to Catherine II., Empress of Russia, who reciprocated her friendship, she stipulated in her will that in case she should die at St. Petersburg she should be buried there, as it was fitting her remains should be there where her heart was. She bequeathed to the Empress a set of jewels, and to the Pope a fine brilliant; to the Countess of Salisbury she left a pair of superb earrings, because they had formerly belonged to a countess of Salisbury in the reign of Henry IV. Notwithstanding her extravagance she left a fortune of two million dollars.

Wanted a Costly Mausoleum

Elizabeth Bastian, a New York spinster, died in June, 1910. By her will she cut off her sister and two brothers with a dollar each and left the greater part of her fortune, $65,000, to build a mausoleum in order that she might “have a splendid house to live in when dead.” Her will has been attacked and her wishes may be thwarted.

The sister and brothers of the decedent, who were bequeathed one dollar each by her, recently began an action in the Surrogate’s Court to set aside the probate of Miss Bastian’s will on the ground that she was mentally incompetent at the time of its execution. They assert, through John Path, their lawyer, that the aged spinster was a monomanic who lived frugally that she might have a magnificent tomb in which to lie after death.

This contention, they claim, is supported by her habits in life and the provisions of her will. When alive, it is alleged, she delighted to take her friends to Woodlawn Cemetery, where she owned a $10,000 plot, and pointing to the spot would say: “There’s where I’m going to live in luxury when I die.”

Her will provided that a cousin with whom she lived should have $500 and his wife a like sum. Three dollars was to be distributed among her sister and brothers, “because I have been treated with abject scorn by my relatives,” and $50,000 was set aside for the mausoleum. The rest of the New York estate was left in trust to the Woodlawn Cemetery Association to ornament and care for the mausoleum.

Bequests of Skulls

Many testators have bequeathed their skulls to their friends or to public institutions.

Cartouche requested, when on the wheel, that his skull might be preserved in the Genovevan monastery at Paris, and accordingly it is to be seen to this day in the library of that building, as Eugene Aram’s skull is daily seen and handled in York Castle.

Professor Morlet of Lausanne desired that his head should be sent to the anatomical museum of Berne, and he particularly requested his name should be distinctly engraven thereon, lest it should be mistaken for that of any other individual.

Professor Byrd Powell, phrenologist and physician, bequeathed to one of his lady pupils, Mrs. Kinsey of Cincinnati, his “head to be removed from his body for her use, by Mr. H. T. Kekeler.” The task of decapitation was, however, performed (some weeks after the body had been relegated to the vault) by Dr. Curtis.

John Reed was gas-lighter of the Walnut Street Theatre, at Philadelphia, and filled this post for forty-four years, with a punctuality and fidelity rarely equalled; there is not on record a single representation at which he was not present. John Reed was somewhat of a character, and appears to have had his mute ambitions. As he never aspired, however, to appear on the stage in his lifetime, he imagined an ingenious device for assuming a rÔle in one of Shakespeare’s plays after his decease; it was not the ghost of Polonius, nor yet the handkerchief of Desdemona—no; it was the skull in Hamlet, and to this end he wrote a clause in his will thus: “My head to be separated from my body immediately after my death; the latter to be buried in a grave; the former, duly macerated and prepared, to be brought to the theatre, where I have served all my life, and to be employed to represent the skull of Yorick—and to this end I bequeath my head to the properties.”

Will of John Redman

The last will of John Redman, who died in 1798, citizen of the world, of Upminster, in Essex. “ ... My body to be buried in the ground in Bunhill Fields, where my grandfather, Captain John Redman, of the navy, in Queen Anne’s reign, lies interred. My grave to be ten feet deep, neither gravestone, atchment (sic), escutcheon, mutes, nor porters at the door, to be performed at seven o’clock in the morning.... All my wine to be drunk on the premises, or to be shared by and between my four executors.... Tylehurst Lodge farm, ... I devise to the eldest son of my second cousin, Mr. Benjamin Branfill, on condition that he, the eldest son, takes the name of Redman, or to his second or third son if the others decline it. It is hereby enjoined to the Branfills to keep the owner’s apartment and land in hand to be a check on shuffling sharping tenants, who are much disposed to impoverish the land.... Having provided handsomely for my daughter, Mary Smith Ord, on her marriage with Craven Ord of the Cursetor’s Office, London, I hereby bequeath to her children born or to be born (the eldest son excepted, whose father will provide for him), the sum of two thousand pounds to each of them at the age of one-and-twenty, for which purpose I bequeath all my valuable estates at Greensted and Ongar, late Rebotiers.... Holding my executors in such esteem, I desire them to pay all the legacies without the wicked swindling and base imposition of stamps that smell of blood and carnage.... To Mr. French of Harpur Street, ... a set of Tom Paine’s ‘Rights of Man,’ bound with common sense, with the answers intended by the longheads of the law, fatheads of the Church, and wiseheads of an insolent usurping aristocracy.... To that valuable friend of his country in the worst of times, Charles Fox, Member for Westminster, five hundred guineas. To each of the daughters of Horne Tooke, five hundred pounds.”

CODICIL

“I desire and direct my executors to keep my dwelling-house on for at least a year after my decease, and also the same with my house in Essex; and I do recommend them to visit Greensted Hall at least six times in that year, and to stop from Saturday to Monday morning; to hire a light coach and an able pair of horses, set out betimes, and breakfast on the road, alternately to take one of their families, that each corner may be filled to help drink out the wine in the vault. The same to be observed in Hatton Garden. Executors to order a dinner for themselves half-score times, to consult and consider the business they have in hand, and not to spare the wine in that cellar, and the remainder at last to be divided between them and carried to their respective houses.”

This will is taken from a volume published for county circulation by Philip John Budworth, M.A., J.P., and D.L., for the county of Essex, and entitled, “Memorials of the Parishes of Greensted—Budworth, Chipping Ongar, and High Laver.”

Will of a Bruxellois

A wealthy individual of Brussels, who died in July, 1824, ordered by his will that his body should be buried in the least expensive manner possible; and that the funeral service should be that known as “third-class;” but that the difference between this and a “first-class” funeral should be computed, and the sum laid out in a thousand loaves, to be distributed to the poor of his parish on the day of his funeral, and a plaquette (value 6½ sous) to be given with each loaf.

Burial Customs in Austria

In the Austrian capital, Vienna, the undertakers have most successfully introduced the custom of dressing up the dead in satins, laces, and flowers, supplying appropriate costumes for maids, brides, wives, widows, with couches en suite, and decorations for the chamber of death, which is brilliantly illuminated, while the corpse, with face painted in the hues of health, lies there raised on satin pillows to receive the visits of a crowd of friends. All is done with great expedition, for the law only allows a delay of twenty-four hours between the death and burial, and all this finery has to be removed after the family and friends have done looking at it, and to be replaced by such grave-clothes as the undertaker chooses to exchange for it beneath the coffin-lid.

Buried in a Trunk

A very singular will was opened, on the 8th of October, 1877, in the office of MaÎtre Robillart, a notary of Paris. It was that of a Sieur BenoÎt, formerly residing at Rue des Gravillers, and lately deceased. The last clause of it was thus worded:

“I expressly and formally desire that my remains may be enclosed for burial in my large leather trunk, instead of putting my survivors to the expense of a coffin. I am attached to that trunk, which has gone round the world with me three times.”

Strange Will of Jeremy Bentham

Jeremy Bentham died in 1832. He was an English jurist, philosopher and writer of great ability. In his latter years he desired that his preserved figure might be placed in a chair at the banquet-table of his friends and disciples when they met on any great occasions of philosophy and philanthropy. He died, and his wish was carefully carried out by his favorite disciple, the late Dr. Southwood Smith, to whom he bequeathed his body in his will. Dressed in his usual clothes, wearing a gray broad-brimmed hat, and with his old hazel walking-stick, called Dapple (after a favorite old horse), the farmer-like figure of the benevolent philosopher sat in a large armchair, with a smiling, fresh-colored countenance, locked up in a mahogany case with a plate-glass front. This was his actual body preserved by some scientific process. A French artist made a wax mask. The real face was underneath it.

The body of Bentham was some years ago removed to University College, and placed in an out-of-the-way corner, and “Old Bentham” was the subject of frequent jokes among the more thoughtless of the students.

This is what Dr. Southwood Smith says on the subject:

“Jeremy Bentham,” writes Dr. Southwood Smith, “left by will his body to me for dissection. I was also to deliver a public lecture over it to medical students and the public generally. The latter I did at Well Street School. After the usual anatomical demonstration a skeleton was made of the bones. I endeavoured to preserve the head untouched, merely drawing away the fluids by placing it under an air-pump over sulphuric acid. By this means the head was rendered as hard as the skulls of the New Zealanders, but all expression was gone, of course. Seeing this would not do for exhibition, I had a model made in wax by a distinguished French artist. I then had the skeleton stuffed out to fit Bentham’s own clothes, and this wax likeness fitted to the trunk. The whole was then enclosed in a mahogany case with folding glass doors, seated in his armchair, and holding in his hand his favourite walking-stick, and for some years it remained in a room of my house in Finsbury Square. But I ultimately gave it to University College, where it now is.”

A Capricious Bequest of Sixpences

A curious custom has existed from time almost immemorial at St. Bartholomew’s the Great, Smithfield, in the churchyard, which is the oldest in the city. Its anniversary is Good Friday, on which day the incumbent is enjoined, by the will of a lady who left a foundation for the purpose, to lay down twenty-one sixpences in a row on a particular gravestone, whence they are to be picked up by as many widows, kneeling, having first attended a sermon which is to be preached on the occasion.

Letters and Portraits in her Coffin

Many persons have a singular mode of disposing of objects for which they have too great a regard to destroy, or even order them after their death to be destroyed, and as a sort of half-measure, desire that they may be buried with them. Not long since a lady died, who being fondly attached to a brother she had lost, had his portrait, in a ponderous gilt frame (which she always carried about with her when she travelled), placed in her coffin at her death.

Actuated by a similar sentiment, Mrs. Anna Margaret Birkbeck, of Inverness Terrace (who died July 2, 1877, and whose will and two codicils, dated January, 1868, were proved on 29th of July, 1877), directs that the letters of her late daughters, of her late son, and of her late husband, both before and after her marriage, be buried with her.

Will of L. Cortusio, Jurisconsultus of Padua

We are indebted to several sources for the following testamentary document: mention is made of it by the celebrated Paolo de Castro; by Scardeon, who gives it more in detail in his “Vies des Jurisconsultes de Padoue,” book ii., chap. viii.; in P. Garasse’s “Doctrine Curieuse,” page 912; and in Dreux de Radier’s “RecrÉations Historiques,” tome i., page 232.

By his last will and testament, the testator in question, Messer Lodovico Cortusio, forbids any of his friends and relatives to weep at his funeral. He among them who shall be found so weeping shall be disinherited; while, on the other hand, he who shall laugh most heartily shall be his principal heir and universal legatee. It would have been superfluous to address to such a man Young’s apostrophe—

It is quite evident he appreciated their value.

The testator next prohibits that his house or the church in which he is to be buried should be hung with black, desiring, on the contrary, that it shall be strewn with flowers and green branches on the day of his funeral. While his body should be borne to the church, he ordered that music should take the place of tolling bells. All the musicians (or minstrels) of the town were to be invited to his burial, however, the number was to be limited to fifty, and were to walk with the clergy, so many to precede, and so many to follow the body, and they were to make the air ring with the sound of lutes, violins, flutes, hautboys, trumpets, tambourines, and other musical instruments; the performance was to wind up with a hallelujah as for an Easter rejoicing, and for their services each was to receive the pay of half-a-crown. The body, enclosed in a bier covered with a cloth of divers colors which were to be bright and striking, was to be carried by twelve young girls habited in green, who were to sing cheerful and lively songs. To each of them the testator bequeathed a certain sum as her dowry. Young boys and girls were to accompany the procession carrying branches or palms, and were to wear on their heads crowns of flowers, while their voices were to join in chorus with those of the bearers. All the clergy belonging to the church, attended by a hundred torch-bearers, were to precede the procession, with all the monks in the town, except those whose habit was black—the express desire of the testator being either that they should wear a light-colored costume or refrain from attending, in order not to sadden the spectacle by an appearance of mourning. The executor appointed by this singular testator was solemnly charged to carry out all these directions in their fullest detail, or was to have no participation in the beneficial clauses of the will. Ludovico Cortusio died on July 17, 1418, Festival of St. Alexis. Strange to say, his wishes were conscientiously complied with. He was buried in the church of Sta. Sophia, at Padua, the ceremony having the appearance rather of a wedding than of a funeral.

Will of a Conjurer

An individual exercising the calling of a conjurer at Rochdale, named Clegg, made a humorous will, in which he desired that, if he should escape hanging, and should die a natural death within two miles of Shaw Chapel, his executors, of whom he named two, should assemble threescore of the truest of his friends—not to include any woman, nor yet man whose avocations compel him to wear a white cap or an apron, nor any man in the habit of taking snuff or using tobacco. Four fiddles were to attend, and the company were to make merry and to dance. For the refreshment of the guests were to be provided sixty-two spiced buns and twenty shillings’ worth of the best ale.

The body, dressed in his “roast-meat” (or Sunday) clothes, was to be laid on a bier in the midst. As each guest arrived, sprigs of gorse, holly, and rosemary were to be distributed, and each was to receive a cake; then all were to make merry for a couple of hours.

The musicians were then to play, in lively time, the tune of “Britons, strike home,” while glasses of gin were being handed round to the company; after this the fiddlers, repeating the said tune, were to head the cortÉge, the guests to follow two-and-two, the whole being closed by the curate riding upon an ass, for which service he was to receive a fee of one guinea. No one was on any account to indulge in tears; and, as soon as the coffin had been covered over, they were to repair to the public-house at which the departed had been best known, and there to eat and drink as they pleased to the amount of thirty shillings, to be defrayed by the “estate.”

No Tombstone Honors

The late Jesse H. Griffen of Yorktown, New York, who was a prominent citizen of that part of the State, drew his will on a bill-head. Among other provisions were these: “I desire that my corpse be put in a plain walnut coffin and carried in an ordinary spring wagon, and that no tombstone be erected where my mortal remains are deposited. I notice that people in moderate circumstances are often distressed by expensive displays at funerals, and tombstone honors are a truer indication of the vanity of survivors than of the virtues of the dead.”

Will of Philippe Bouton

Philippe Bouton, bailli of Dijon, dying in 1515, desired by his will that fourteen girls should be found, who, being clothed in green cloth,—that hue being sacred to hope,—should attend at his obsequies, and at all the services consequent thereon. He was buried in the church of Corberon.

Will of Charles Bouton (of Poitou)

“I, Charles Bouton, Seigneur of Fay, desire by this my will and testament, that after my death the sacristans of Louhaus shall throw over my coffin a white winding-sheet, that they shall recite the psalter before carrying it into the church; that they shall have my body carried into the Church of St. Peter of Louhaus, where it shall repose one night; that on the following morning it shall be placed on a waggon, such as those used for carting manure, and borne to my chapel of Fay and deposited within its charnel-house, there to be left without any other light than that of four small tapers, each weighing half-a-pound.”

This testator does not appear to have been in any way related to the Philippe Bouton cited above: he died in 1532.

Will of an English Farmer

A Hertfordshire farmer inserted in his will his written wish that “as he was about to take a thirty years’ nap, his coffin might be suspended from a beam in his barn, and by no means nailed down.” He, however, permitted it to be locked, provided a hole were made in the side through which the key might be pushed, so that he might let himself out when he awoke. However, as his death took place in 1720, and in 1750 he showed no signs of waking, his nephew, who inherited his property, after allowing him one year’s grace, caused a hole to be dug and had the coffin put into it.

Will of M. Helloin, Juge de Paix

This gentleman, well known as a magistrate, and residing on his own landed property, close to Caen, in Normandy, France, died in the month of June, 1828. He was of eccentric habits, and of the calmest and most placid disposition. Nothing was ever known to ruffle his equanimity or to disturb the repose and tranquillity of his domestic arrangements. He lived and died unmarried, and passed his life either reclining on a couch or lying in bed. Even when exercising his judicial functions he maintained this recumbent attitude; his bedroom became his audience-chamber, and he gave judgment in a horizontal position, his body lazily stretched out, and his head thrown back on a down pillow. This luxurious life, however, did not suffice to protect him from the inevitable lot of mortals; and M. Helloin, in due time, felt that his end was not far off. Under these circumstances he made his will, apparently with the intention of proving his fidelity to his traditions, for he decreed thereby that “he should be buried at night, in his bed, and in the position in which death should surprise him—viz., with his mattress, sheets, blankets, pillows—and, in short, all that constituted the belongings of a bedstead.” As there was some difficulty in carrying out such a clause, an enormous pit was dug, and the deceased was lowered into his last resting-place exactly as he had died, nothing around or about him having been altered. Boards were placed above the bedstead, in order that the earth, when filled in again, should not trouble the repose of this imperturbable Quietist.

His Ashes improved the Fishing

A German gentleman, who was a member of a New York fishing club, in his will requested his fellow-fishermen, after cremating his body, to throw his ashes into the sea on the shoals of New York Bay, where he had often fished. The will was carried out to the letter. Although it cannot be asserted that the ashes attracted the fish, the fishermen related that when they again threw out their lines where they had sprinkled the remains of their deceased friend, they made an exceptionally large catch.

Buried in his Bed

The Reverend Langton Freeman, rector of Bilton, Northamptonshire, England, desired in his will that his body should be left undisturbed on the bed whereon he died till it could no longer be kept, that it was then to be carried, bed and all, decently and privately to the summer-house in his own private garden at Whilton. The bed with the body on it was then to be wrapped in a strong double winding-sheet, and to be treated in all respects as was the body of our Lord. The doors and windows of the summer-house were then to be secured, and the building planted round with evergreens and fenced with dark-blue palings. This eccentric will was conscientiously obeyed. The fence and even the trees have now disappeared, and the summer-house is in ruins. Some years ago an entrance was effected through the roof, and the deceased was found completely mummified, without any wrappers, one arm lying down by the side, the other across the chest.

Will of a New York Spinster

A spinster of New York desired that all the money she should die possessed of, might be employed in building a church in her native city, but stipulated that her remains should be mixed up in the mortar used for fixing the first stone.

Will of a Rich Jewess

A rich Jewess residing in London died in 1794. Having all her days regretted not to have passed her life in the ancient and celebrated city illustrated by the presence and the great deeds of David, Solomon, the prophets, the Maccabees, and others, she resolved that at all events her mortal remains should await there the day of their resurrection. She accordingly ordered by her will that her body should be carried from England to Jerusalem, to be buried there. Two of her coreligionists established in London were chosen by her to accompany her body and fulfil her last wishes; these gentlemen were gratified each with a legacy of four hundred pounds to pay their expenses.

Robert Fabyan

There are some extremely curious and valuable clauses in this will which would be too long to transcribe, and probably tedious to the majority of readers. It is dated 1511. Those who wish to read it in its entirety are referred to vol. ii., “Testamenta Vetusta,” page 498.

We will confine ourselves to a portion of his instructions for his “little tumbe of freestone, upon the which I will be spent liij s. iv d. att the moast; and in the face of this tumbe I will be made too plates of laten, ii figurys of a man and a woman, with x men children and vi women children; and over and above the said figurys I will be made a figure of the Fader of Heven, inclosed in a sonne; and from the man figure I will be made a rolle toward the said figure of the Fader, and in hit to be graven, ‘O Pater in coelis;’ and from the figure of the woman another lyke rolle, whereyn to be graven, ‘Hos tecum pascere velis;’ and at the feet of the said figurys I will be graven thes ix verses folowing:

“And before upon the said tumbys border I will be written these words following:

“‘Tumulus Roberti Fabyan dudum pannarius ac Aldermannus London qui obiit.... Fevr....’”

The above directions were to be followed in the event of the testator’s dying and being buried “within the Citye of London,” but if buried in the church of Heydon Earnon, the grave is to be much more elaborately decorated, according to instructions further given to his executors, who can have had no sinecure, for this same alderman-draper seems to have been possessed of considerable landed and other property.

We find it throughout all these earlier wills the custom to bequeath not only beds with all their furniture, but wearing apparel, which in those days were so costly as to be considered valuable heirlooms; probably also the fashion of these articles did not undergo such rapid changes as in our own day.

An Exacting and Peculiar Will

After an eventful life as soldier, linguist, “rain-maker,” Deputy Commissioner of Patents, man of affairs, and wealthy patent attorney, Robert G. Dryenforth, of Washington, D.C., died July 4, 1910. His will is one of the most unusual instruments ever offered for probate in the United States: his estate is a large one and is left to an eight-year-old foster son, Robert St. George Dryenforth, subject to conditions of a remarkable character:

The lad is to get practically the entire estate—provided he conscientiously complies with all conditions—when he reaches the age of twenty-eight. Robert St. George will be busily occupied for the intervening twenty years in complying with conditions.

Here are some of them.

He must not associate with one Jennie Dryenforth or her daughter, Rose Marie Knowlton. Should he do so, the estate goes to William H., Harold and Robert Dryenforth, who are named as executors.

The above-named executors will also share the estate in the event Robert St. George thoughtlessly dies before he reaches the given age.

The boy must be trained right from the start to shy at the wiles of women. If he must marry, he must not marry beneath him.

The will says:

“I particularly request my executors to thoughtfully and well guard my beloved son from women, and sensibly, that is, gradually, through no erratic extreme, to let him be informed and know the artful and parasitical nature of most of the unfortunate sex, and to care that he does not marry beneath him.”

The lad must keep his face between the covers of a book for a great portion of these twenty years. He will become a confirmed burner of the midnight oil. Here is the programme, duly mapped out in the will:

He must be prepared to enter high school at the age of fourteen.

At the age of eighteen he must be ready to enter Harvard, there to take a special course fitting him for Oxford University.

In the meantime, the boy must be taken to see one country in Europe each year.

As soon as he graduates from Oxford, the boy is to hasten back to these shores and to enter immediately the United States Military Academy, complete the course and serve the required time in the army.

After he has well and patiently performed these preliminary tasks, the young man is then required to take up the practice of law, at which profession he may while his time away until he reaches the twenty-eighth milestone. Upon that happy and long-delayed day, the executors will take an inventory, and if the stewardship of Robert St. George has been good, he will receive talents an hundred fold.

Scattered about through the will are minor restrictions, having to do with the boy’s religion and habits. The lad must be reared a Protestant Episcopalian. He will have no difficulty whatever in picking his faith, his father having attended to this detail before he departed this life.

In no event is the boy to be permitted to become a Catholic, and the executors are further charged with the duty of seeing that the late Lawyer Dryenforth’s remains are not interred in a Catholic cemetery nor in Arlington.

A graduating scale of allowances for the boy’s maintenance also has been carefully worked out in the will. Until he is twelve years of age Robert St. George must not overdraw an account of $50 monthly. After that age, $1000 yearly is set aside for his support and education. Later, the amount is to be increased to $1500 per year, which will help some in event Robert St. George is not immediately retained by some of the big corporations as soon as he hangs out his shingle as a lawyer.

Dame Maud De Say

Dame Maud, daughter of Guy, Earl of Warwick, widow of Geoffrey, Lord Say, Admiral of the King’s Fleet, died Tuesday next after the Feast of the Apostles Simon and Jude, 1369. Her will recites:

“My body to be buried in the Church of the Friars Preachers of London, near Edmond, my loving husband; to the Friars there X pounds, and I desire that no feast be made on my funeral day, but that immediately after my decease my corpse shall be carried to burial, covered only with a linen cloth, having a red cross thereon, with two tapers, one at the head and another at the feet.”

A Mother’s Pathetic Affection

A lady, who was a singularly affectionate mother, lost two of her children, one aged three, the other five; their remains were carried with the usual ceremonies to the family vault, but she found it impossible to part with them, and having obtained the permission of the clergyman to have them exhumed, she had the two little coffins carried back to the house, and glass lids made to them. They were kept in a room set apart for the purpose, and remained there until her death—a period of a quarter of a century. On that event they were again buried by one of her sons, a clergyman, who, having been born long after their death, used to remark: “There was not probably another clergyman who could say he had buried two people who died before he was born.”

Will of Mr. Greftulke

An individual named Greftulke, who entertained a great dread of being buried alive, added to his will this clause: “I do not wish to be buried; but desire that my body be embalmed, and placed in a coffin, the lid of which shall be glazed; also I desire it be not nailed down, so that my body may not be deprived of air and light. Ultimately it may be buried, if the law permit.”

This will was proved October, 1867, and signed John Louis Greftulke.

Will of Thomas Hollis

This testator, Thomas Hollis of Cusicombe, Dorsetshire, England, ordered his corpse to be buried in one of his cornfields, ten feet below the surface, and the ground to be immediately ploughed, so that no trace of the spot might remain.

Will of Mrs. Maria Redding

This lady’s behests are sufficiently singular to be recorded here: “If,” she writes, “I should die away from Branksome, I desire that my remains, after being duly placed in the usual coffins (i.e. first a leaden and then an elm one), be enclosed in a plain deal box, and conveyed by goods train to Poole. Let no mention be made of the contents, as the conveyance will then not be charged more for than an ordinary package. From Poole station let it be brought in a cart to Branksome tower, and it will be found the easiest way to get the coffin out of the house will be to take out one of the diningroom windows.” This will was probated in 1870.

The Will of the Dowager Countess of Sandwich

This will provides against those useless inventions, which only serve to aggravate the grief of the survivors, and to swell the extortionate charges of the upholsterers of death. She therefore forbids “all grotesque paraphernalia, desiring only to be buried quietly and decently, with no scarfs, hatbands, or other excuses for fraud and cheating.”

Horror of Darkness

A Vienna millionnaire seemed to have a horror of darkness, for he provided that not only the vault in which his body was to be placed should be lighted by electricity, but the coffin should be similarly illumined.

Will of La Duchesse D’Olonne

This lady, whose life was full of eccentricities, seems to have been determined to signalize her departure from the world by the singularity of her testamentary dispositions.

She desired in her will, probated in 1776, that her body should be carried into the principality of Lux, situated in Basse Navarre, and about two hundred and fifty miles from Paris. So far there was nothing very extraordinary; but she also desired to be followed by a very long procession, which was to consist of six mourning-coaches draped with black, for the family and the ecclesiastics, and of two hundred persons bearing torches, who were to receive a crown a day. The cortÈge was to walk at a solemn pace, and not to make more than five leagues per day, and at every five leagues, or as near that distance as it was possible to find a convenient resting-place, a funeral service was to be celebrated before the procession started again, and every church where such service should be held was to be hung with black.

What the cost of all this ceremony amounted to may be computed by the cost of the carriages alone, the hire of which amounted to eighteen thousand francs.

By another article in her will, the duchess devises liberal donations and annuities to her servants, proportioned to their services, but at the same time she sends them into exile; for she assigns to each a fixed residence at a certain distance from Paris, so that they shall be all separated from each other, and she specifies that they can only receive such annuities in the locality appointed them, and on condition that they shall make that their residence, because, as she alleges, she does not wish them to congregate together, and talk about her affairs and her character.

She left fifteen thousand francs to the poet RobbÉ, whom she lodged and supported in Paris, though it is difficult to discover on what grounds she patronized a man of such mediocre merit.

Lady Nicotine

A young lady of Kentucky exhibited a depth of sentiment rarely equalled, when she directed in her will that tobacco should be planted over her grave, that the weed, nourished by her dust, might be smoked by her bereaved lovers.

Forget John Underwood

On the 6th of May, 1735, was buried at Wittesca, Mr. John Underwood, of Lexington. The body was lowered into the grave at five o’clock, and as soon as the prayers were concluded a marble tablet was fixed at the extremity of the grave, bearing this inscription:

Non omnis moriar,
JOHN UNDERWOOD
May 6, 1735.

All the detail of the interment was in strict accordance with the testamentary prescriptions of the deceased, and proceeded as follows: As soon as the grave was filled up and covered with turf, the six friends who, by his desire, had attended on the occasion, sang the last stanza of the twentieth ode of the second book of Horace:

No bell was tolled; no relative was present; the bier was painted green, and the body was laid on it dressed in ordinary clothes; beneath the head was placed a copy of Horace, at his feet a Milton, on his right hand a small Greek Bible, with his name on the binding in gilt letters, on the left a smaller edition of Horace, with the inscription “Musis amicus, J.U.,” and under his shoulders Bentley’s Horace. When the ceremony was concluded, his friends returned to his house, where his sister awaited them, and all sat down to an elegant supper; after it was over, the company joined in singing the thirty-first ode of the first book of Horace:

Then they drank gayly for some time, but retired at eight o’clock. Mr. John Underwood bequeathed about fifty thousand dollars to his sister, on condition that she should carry out faithfully the conditions of his will. He left $50 to each of his friends, requesting them not to wear mourning; then came the singular directions, which were carried out as above, and the will concluded thus: “ ... This done, I request my friends to separate, after drinking cheerfully together, and to think no more of John Underwood.”

Without Pomp or Vainglory

Joan, Lady Bergavenny, whose will is dated 10th of January, 1434, wills “that my body be kept unburied in the place where it happeneth me to die, unto the time my ‘maygne’ (household) be clothed in black, my hearse, my chare, and other convenable purveyance made, and then to be carried unto the place of my burying before rehearsed, with all the worship that ought to be done unto a woman of mine estate, which God knoweth well proceedeth not of no pomp or vain glory, that I am set in for my body, but for a memorial and remembrance of my soul to my kin, friends, servants, and all other....”

Desired Beautiful Scenery

Lord Camelford, the famous duellist, wrote a codicil to his will, by which he desired that his body “should not be buried within city walls or the haunts of men, but should be removed to a far-distant spot, where the surrounding scenery might smile upon his remains.” The Lake of St. Lampierre, in Switzerland, was the spot selected. On the borders of this lake was a sloping bank marked by three trees. The testator designated the centre one as that under which he had passed many hours meditating on the mutability of human affairs, and he requested that this might be carefully removed, his body interred beneath it, and the tree replaced. These, his last wishes, were faithfully executed.

Will of Richard-sans-Peur

This brave Duke of Normandy had prepared his tomb, many years before his death, in the Abbey of FÉcamp, and ordered that his burial should be conducted with the utmost simplicity. So great was his humility that he expressed his wishes as follows: “Je veulx estre enseveli devant l’huys de l’Église, afin d’Être coneulquÉ (trodden under foot) de tous les entrans dans l’Église.” These, his last wishes, were executed; but some years after an Abbot of FÉcamp, considering that “À si digne personnage plus dÉcente sÉpulture appartenait,” had his body exhumed and buried in front of the altar.

Fifteen Maidens with Torches

FranÇois de la Palu Varembon, Seigneur de Beaumont sur Vingeanne, in Burgundy, made, in 1456, a will by which he testifies his objection to lugubrious colors at his interment; desiring that fifteen maidens of the very poorest of his vassals, clothed in white cloth at the expense of his estate, each wearing a scarlet hood and carrying a torch of three pounds’ weight, should walk in procession before the body, and that his heirs shall also wear white at his funeral and at every successive anniversary of his death. He further orders that four wax candles, of twenty-five pounds’ weight each, shall be placed at the corners of his coffin.

Body carried to a CafÉ

One September afternoon, in 1874, an empty hearse was seen standing at about four o’clock at the entrance of the salons of the CafÉ Riche, Rue Le Peletier. On inquiry it was found that a frequenter of this famous establishment had inserted in his will a clause to this effect:

“I desire that on the day of my burial I may be carried round by the Rue Le Peletier, to visit once more the table where I have spent so many of the pleasantest hours of my life.”

As we have seen, this singular wish was respected by the survivors of the testator.

Barber not wanted

The will, dated January 9th, 1873, of Mr. Richard Christopher Carrington, late of Churt, near Farnham, Surrey, England, astronomer, who died on the previous November 27th, was proved by Mrs. Esther Clarke Carrington, the mother of the deceased, the personal estate being sworn under £20,000. The testator desired to be buried at a depth of between ten and twelve feet in the grounds surrounding his own freehold house at Churt, at an expense not exceeding £5, without any service being read over his grave, and without any memorial being erected to his memory; and he directed that after his death neither his chin be shaved nor his shirt changed. He bequeathed to the Royal Society and the Royal Astronomical Society £2000 Three Per Cent. Consolidated Bank Annuities each, both free of legacy duty.

Young Lady’s Picturesque Funeral

A somewhat unusual funeral cortÈge astonished the inhabitants of Brighton, England, traversing it from the west end to the railway station, one morning in the autumn of 1879. Concerning it some very romantic, highly imaginative, but somewhat incorrect rumors gained currency. The funeral was that of a young lady, named Ellen Elizabeth Parren, the daughter of William Parren, Esq., of Beckenham, in Kent, who had arrived in Brighton that day week, on a visit to her uncle, Captain Dunhill, of Brunswick Road. Though delicate, she was thought to be in her usual health; but on the following Monday she died somewhat suddenly. The deceased young lady, being a great favorite both in her own family and amongst her friends, it was decided that the obsequies should not partake of that gloomy and melancholy character which is the usually accepted mode of burial, but that it should be more inspiring and hopeful in its tone. The handsome funeral car was drawn by four grays, in the place of black horses, and the funeral coaches were represented by three landaus, each drawn by a pair of grays. The coffin, having been placed upon the car, was covered by a handsome white-and-gold pall, upon which were laid a number of beautiful wreaths of white flowers. The cortÈge as thus arranged left Brunswick Road, Hove, for the railway station, and then proceeded to Croydon. Here, the funeral procession having been rearranged and augmented by two other landaus drawn by pairs of grays and a number of private carriages, proceeded to Norwood Cemetery, where the remains were laid in the grave, the service being performed by two Nonconformist ministers, the Rev. Mr. Eldridge and the Rev. Mr. Jenkinson. The coffin was of polished oak, with plated silver ornaments and inscription plate, the latter having upon it the following: “Ellen Elizabeth, daughter of Wm. Parren, Esq., died August 25, 1879, aged 25.”

To curtail Funeral Bills

The will of Mr. Francis Offley Martin, formerly of Lincoln’s Inn, but late of 89 Onslow Gardens, one of the Charity Commissioners for England and Wales, who died on December 4th, 1878, was proved by William Smith, the sole executor, the personal estate being sworn under £7000. The testator, in his directions for his funeral, provides that no scarfs or hatbands be used or given away on the occasion either to the clergyman or any other person, as he wishes to break through the custom of running up funeral bills; and he declares that this prohibition is to extend also to gloves.

Full Dress Uniform

The late Surgeon-Major Wyatt, C.B., of the Coldstream Guards, who did good service to suffering humanity in Paris after the siege in 1871, desired in his will to be buried in the full-dress uniform of the regiment in which he had passed the greater part of his useful and honorable life. A Bible presented to him by his wife was to be placed in his coffin, and the horses used at his funeral were not to be “decorated”—plumed and draped, we presume—in any manner; the mutes and other attendants were not to wear hatbands or scarfs; each person attending his funeral was to wear in token of mourning only a black band of medium width—crape for relatives and cloth for friends; the gloves were to be black; but each person in the procession was to wear a camellia or other white flower in his buttonhole, as it was the worthy surgeon-major’s wish that the ceremony “should be as free as possible from all gloomy associations, and to be considered more as an occasion for rejoicing than for mourning.” Consonant with this leading idea was the expressed wish that no kind of widow’s cap or weeds should be worn by his relict, and no particle of crape should appear on the garments of his relations. Side by side with this, publication was given to a will announcing the desire of another testator to be buried with a hearse surmounted by sable ostrich-plumes, with horses duly panachÉs and caparisoned, mutes and bearers and “pages,” scarfs and flowing hatbands and brazen-tipped staves, and all the rest of that elaborate panoply of woe which finds so much favor in the eyes, and affords such comfortable entries in the books, of old-established undertakers. Quot homines, tot sententiÆ, thus every man seems to be of a different mind concerning the ordering of his funeral.

Under the Oak Trees

Sir Charles Hastings requested that his body might “not be coffined, but swathed in any coarse stuff that would hold it together, and then buried in a spot designated by him. That the ground should then be planted with acorns, so that he might render a last service to his country by contributing to nourish some good English oaks.”

An Abnormal Burial

Lord Truro, of England, whose residence was at Falconhurst, on the summit of Shooter’s Hill, afforded a novel example of funeral simplicity. On the demise of Lady Truro, Lord Truro having, according to her desire, placed the body in a lightly constructed box, so that the process of decay might not be arrested, buried it himself in a grave dug in the lawn fronting the house, at a spot she had selected for the purpose. The grave is about four feet deep, and a marble monument has been raised upon it.

Protected his Whiskers

Valentine Tapley, owner of the longest beard in the world, died Saturday, April 2, 1910, at his home, Spencerburg, Pike County, Missouri. He was eighty years old. It is said that when Lincoln was a candidate for the Presidency, Mr. Tapley, who was a Democrat, made a vow that if Lincoln was elected he would never cut his beard. The length of his beard was 12½ feet for several years prior to his death. This is said to be longer than any other beard known. Mr. Tapley took great pride in his whiskers, and wore them wrapped in silk and wound about his body. During the latter part of his life he was apprehensive his grave would be robbed for his whiskers, and in his will he made provision for a tomb of extra strength to guard against this. Mr. Tapley declined several offers to exhibit his beard. He was a large owner of Pike County farming land, and died wealthy.

Dastards and Fools

In France, not long ago, died an eccentric Frenchman who declared the French to be “a nation of dastards and fools.” For that reason, he devised the whole of his fortune to the people of London, and directed that his body be thrown into the sea a mile from the English coast. An attempt was made to have him adjudged insane when he made the will, but it failed.

Recipe and Restitution

Another Frenchman directed that a new cooking recipe should be pasted on his tomb every day; and still another Frenchman, a lawyer, left fifty thousand dollars to a lunatic asylum, declaring that it was simply an act of restitution to the clients who were insane enough to employ his services.

To the Four Winds

A queer request was made by a German who died in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in 1887. By his will, he directed that his body should be cremated and the ashes forwarded to the German Consul at New York, who was to deliver them to the captain of the steamship Elbe. When in mid-ocean, the captain was to request a passenger to dress himself in nautical costume, and, ascending with the funeral urn to the topmast, to scatter the ashes to the four winds of heaven. And these strange directions were literally carried out.

Their Ashes into the Mississippi River

During the last twenty-five years, the great Eads Bridge, which spans the Mississippi River at St. Louis, Missouri, has been favored as a spot by those who desired that their mortal ashes should be scattered to the winds. On more than one occasion, could have been seen unusual gatherings on the bridge, and after certain religious formalities, human ashes have been deposited in the river.

The latest ceremony of this kind occurred on Sunday, January, 29, 1911: Joel Braunmiller, an eccentric old bachelor, lived alone in a large house on his farm, eight miles north of Maryville, Missouri. He died recently, and left a large estate to his brothers and sisters. The following clause was contained in his will:

“I direct that after my death, my body be shipped by express to St. Louis, Mo., and there cremated and my ashes strewn to the winds from the south side of the Eads Bridge over the river.”

On the date named, Charles R. Lupton, an undertaker of St. Louis, with an urn containing the ashes of Mr. Braunmiller, leaned over the south parapet of the bridge, tipped the urn gradually, and let the ashes fall into the river. The wind, whirling about the piers and buttresses of the great bridge, caught up the ashes and flung them in every direction. When the urn had been emptied, it, too, was dropped into the river.

Mr. S. H. Kemp, Cashier of the Maryville National Bank, who was a close friend of Mr. Braunmiller, and also the executor of his will, stood close beside the undertaker to see that the ceremony was carried out according to the wishes of the deceased. There were also present relatives of the deceased, who had come from various parts of the United States.

Ruling Passion Strong in Death

The wife of Mr. Fisher Dilke, of England, brother-in-law to Sir Peter Wentworth, one of the regicide judges, was interred in the year 1660 in a very singular way.

Her husband caused her coffin to be made of the wooden palings of his barn, and bargaining hard with the sexton beat him down from “a shilling” (the usual sum) to a groat (fourpence); he avoided the expense of bearing by begging four of his friends and neighbors to discharge this office. Having assembled them he read to them a chapter of the book of Job, and then distributed to them the contents of a bottle of Burgundy and sixpennyworth of spiced cakes. As there was no ecclesiastic present, Dilke himself, who acted as chief mourner, took up the spade, and as soon as the coffin was lowered, threw earth upon it, repeating the usual words, “Dust to dust,” etc., adding, “Lord, now lettest thou,” etc. Then the party returned home.

5
MISCELLANEOUS

Her Adorable Nose

A certain individual, one of the Vanderbilts, left to a lady a bequest in these words: “I supplicate Miss B. to accept my whole fortune, too feeble an acknowledgment of the inexpressible sensations which the contemplation of her adorable nose has produced on me.”

Remembered the Police Station

Not long ago a will was contested in New York, because the testatrix had bequeathed a grand piano, several oil paintings, and five pieces of Japanese pottery to a police station. The protesting heir won the case, and there was a reversion of these art treasures to the natural heirs.

All smiled Sweetly

A certain will reads, “to that amiable young lady, Miss Blank, who smiles so sweetly in the street when we meet, I give Twenty-Five Hundred Dollars.” Now in the Blank family, there were six sisters; they all claimed to be “the amiable young lady,” but which of them got the legacy, history sayeth not.

A Salutation Directed

Pursuant to the will of Sir John Salter, who died in the year 1605, and who was a good benefactor to the Company, the beadles and servants of the Worshipful Company of Salters are to attend at St. Magnus’ Church, London Bridge, in the first week in October, and knock upon his gravestone, with sticks or staves, three times each person, and say, “How do you do, Brother Salter? I hope you are well.”

No Underclothes in Winter

A crabbed old German professor, who died at Berlin in 1900, entertaining a great dislike for his sole surviving relative, left his property to him, but on the absolute condition that he should always wear white linen clothes at all seasons of the year, and should not supplement them in winter by extra undergarments.

Had $100, gave away $700,000

A singular will was that of Miss Cora Johnson, who resided in an apartment at No. 819 Beacon Street, Boston, and who died in September, 1910, at a hospital in that city. The value of her entire possessions, when inventoried, was found not to exceed $100, and she was buried by friends; yet, by her will, she created bequests and legacies amounting to $700,000; she claimed that she was entitled to a large fortune from the estate of an unnamed person living in New York.

Miss Johnson, it is claimed, never revealed the name of this person, and even her attorney, who drew her will, was not acquainted with it; all she disclosed was that she expected a large estate from a wealthy, elderly woman, who made her will in her favor and became insane, and was in a sanitarium in New York, and this will could not be changed by reason of the insanity of the testator. Evidently, she had a firm conviction that the estate must reach her, in any event.

That part of the will referring to the promised millions reads:

“Whereas it is possible that at the time of my decease I shall not be the owner of property sufficient in amount to pay the foregoing bequests, and

“Whereas I have been credibly informed and believe that there is in existence a certain will made by a person now an inhabitant of the city and state of New York by which will certain property is devised and bequeathed to me, and

“Whereas I have been credibly informed and believe that in said will it is provided, that in case I shall die before the maker of said will, the property therein bequeathed and devised to me, shall pass to and be paid over and delivered to the persons, corporations and objects which I shall in my last will name, select and appoint:

“Now, therefore, I do hereby exercise any and all powers of appointment contained in and given to me by any such will by any person if any such will there be, desiring and intending that whether or not I survive the maker of said will, the persons, corporations and institutions hereinbefore named shall be benefited in accordance with and to the extent of the terms of this instrument, either as legatees hereunder in case of my survival of the maker of said will, or as my appointees thereunder in case of my predecease.”

His Earthly Happiness

An old bachelor, on dying, left the whole of his property to three ladies to whom he had proposed marriage, and who had refused him. The reason for this bequest, he stated, was that by their refusal, “to them I owe all my earthly happiness.”

Must pay for her Drinks

Mr. Davis, of Clapham, England, left the sum of 5s. “to Mary Davis, daughter of Peter Delaport, which is sufficient to enable her to get drunk for the last time at my expense.”

Imaginary Wife and Children

A Mr. George, resident of one of the British Colonies, who died possessed of a large property, contrived to puzzle the brains of his executors by imagining and inserting in his will two heirs who had no existence but in his brain. After bequeathing his worldly goods in the usual form, he named as his residuary legatees a son and daughter, whom he stated to be his children by a beautiful Circassian he had married at Plymouth in St. Peter’s Church. He added that, though the lady had subsequently eloped with a parson, he bore no ill-will to the children, whom she had taken with her, but should be glad to think they would be traced and apprised of their good fortune.

The whole romance turned out to be a complete fabrication, but not until it had severely tried the patience of the executors.

This Foolish World a Dream

Harris Bletzer, who died on August 21, 1910, at his home, 35 Moore Street, Brooklyn, N.Y., worth about $10,000, had pretty definite ideas as to how he wanted his money to go after his death, and he also had come to the conclusion that, after all, this was a foolish world and a dream, so he wrote down in Hebrew his philosophical conclusions and had it properly attested as his last will and testament. This remarkable document has been translated for Surrogate Ketcham’s benefit, and it has been offered for probate.

Mr. Bletzer wants his wife to have all his money for her lifetime, and she isn’t to be dictated to by anybody, either, as to what she does with it, the testator says, for she worked for it as hard as her husband did. But he says that when their two daughters, Sarah and Mazie, get married, their mother can spend $2000 upon each of them, and it shall be considered as their share of their father’s estate. After the widow dies, then the money is to be divided among the sons. The reason for his opinion of life is given in language not quite grammatical, as follows:

“Lying in my bed, with my weak strength, and figured out with a clear mind and a clear conscience, man going through his life in this foolish world; so I have decided, with my full reason, that the entire world is a dream. The years run by and the day of leave-taking is expected, and I have decided to declare what shall be done with my little wealth which I have accumulated by my sweat through my hard work.”

It paid to be Heavy

A Scotchman left to each of his daughters her weight in one-pound bank notes. By this provision, one daughter, being stouter than the other, received $30,000 more than her sister.

Opposed to Mustaches

Mr. Fleming, an upholsterer, of Pimlico, by his will, proved in 1869, left £10 each to the men in his employ—those who did not wear mustaches; those who persisted in wearing them to have £5 only.

Must be Tall

The county of Yorkshire in England is noted for its tall men, and a resident of that county left his entire estate to those of his descendants who were not less than six feet four inches in height.

Newspaper Reading Prohibited

A Vienna banker made a bequest to his nephew with the stipulation that “he shall never, on any occasion, read a newspaper, his favorite occupation.”

A Beam and Bell

The will of Reginald atte Pette, of Stockbury, dated 12th of January, 1456, is in part as follows: “Item, I bequeath toward the making of a new beam in the Church of Stockbury, xiii s. iiii d.; towards a new bell called trebyll vi s. viii d.; towards the work of the new isle in the aforesaid Church iv marcs; and towards the making of a new window there xx s. Witnesses, John Petytt, Nich. Cowstede, Adomar atte Pette, Thomas atte Pette, Peter atte Pette, Christopher, Clerk of the Parish there, Vicar of Stockbury.”

Must become an Actress

A maiden lady over fifty years of age, with a strong aversion to all theatrical amusements, was scandalized by being put down for a legacy in the will of a facetious friend, who attached the condition that within six months of the testator’s death the legatee obtain an engagement at a theatre and must perform there for one whole week.

Will sustained, Codicil rejected

A Protestant clergyman, the Reverend John Markhouse, aged 70, bequeathed £12,000 for the purpose of establishing a school for illegitimate children only, at Bradchurch, Hants, England. He added a codicil providing for educational expenses by a further sum of £8000. The disappointed relatives appealed against the will; but the court, strangely enough, decided in favor of the will and against the codicil, on consideration of the plea that towards the close of his life he had appeared eccentric enough to justify the conclusion that he was not of sound mind when he wrote the latter. Nevertheless the sequitur seems logical enough.

Music

An Englishman, Richard Lane, otherwise Tomson, by his will, dated 24th of July, 1619, gave to one of the deacons of the Cathedral Church of Hereford 40s. yearly forever, to prick fairly into books, songs, and church service, for the use of the same church; and upon his coming every half-year for his wages, he should bring with him the sub-chanter of the choir, who would show to him who had the payment of the money, what he had done in that business the half-year last past; and if he should be found negligent therein, then the payment for that time should be given to twelve poor men the Saturday next following.

Repeat the Catechism on Christmas Day

Robert Barber, Cambridgeshire, England, by will, dated 21st of June, 1818, gave unto the minister of Haslingfield and the tenant of the farm, on which Mr. Wallace then lived, £20 in trust, to be placed out at interest, upon good security, and the interest thereof to be by them given every year after his decease unto that child under the age of thirteen years, who should most perfectly repeat the Catechism, on Christmas Day.

A Plain Case

The will of E. J. Halley was filed for probate in October last at Memphis, Tennessee. It would seem from attendant circumstances that Mr. Halley was not a teetotaler, and that prohibition is not entirely effective in Tennessee.

Mr. Halley was the foster son of a lady known as “Joanna Madden, the hermit”: contrary to the rule in such matters, this hermit left a large estate, consisting of gold and silver snugly put away in her home; a squad of policemen escorted the money to a local bank; this Mr. Halley received, but he did not live long to enjoy it; but it is reported, however, that he did enjoy it while he lived. Death came, and by his will, duly executed, he left the estate to schoolmates, nurses, favorite baseball players, deputy sheriffs, and a few orphan asylums, for good measure; with some of the legatees he was not acquainted. Among other provisions in this highly interesting testament, may be recited the following:

“To the nurse who kindly removed a pink monkey from the foot of my bed, $5000.”

“To the cook at the hospital who removed snakes from my broth, $5000.”

The heirs at law reached the conclusion that too high a value had been put upon these services and temporary friendships, and filed a bill to enjoin the payment of the legacies.

Penchant for Paper-knives

M. Charles Asselineau, a well-known Frenchman, died in 1874. His estate appears to have consisted largely of books and paper-knives. These he disposed of by will in a bequest to a relative. He had as many paper-knives as Clapisson had whistles or Buffon butterflies, and they were all more or less remarkable by reason of the celebrity of the donors, or former owners, and the unique inscriptions they bore. Those who are interested may find amusement, if not recreation, in an attempt to ascertain the point and meaning of some of the phrases.

On one given him by Victor Hugo we read: “Madame, il fait grand vent et j’ai tuÉ six loups.”

On that of Ponsard: “Quand la borne est franchie, il n’y a plus de limites.”

On that of Émile Augier: “Ce qui tombe au fossÉ, Madame, est au soldat.” And so on.

In this collection are paper-knives that had belonged to BÉranger, Bauville, Autran, Camille Doucet, and many other French writers of fame, each carefully enclosed in a case of its own and labelled.

An Odd Lot

There is a well-authenticated case of a wealthy man leaving his riches to deserving old maids, but he let his own daughters pine in single blessedness for want of portions. There was also an individual who desired to set up a lifeboat, compelling his boys to “paddle their own canoe,” and there is yet another testator who, when death approached, bestowed his estate for the planting of a botanical garden, leaving his daughters to fade as wallflowers, and his sons to go to seed in penury; and these testamentary schemes were upheld, notwithstanding the adage that “Charity begins at home.”

A Butcher made Happy

An old Parisian lady residing in the Rue Fontaine St. Georges, left by will the whole of her fortune to her butcher. Its amount was invested in rentes, and produced $7500 a year.

The butcher was in no way related to her, did not even know her by sight, neither had she ever seen him. As the testatrix had no heirs either direct or collateral, and no relations, the will was not disputed, and the butcher glided quite comfortably into his new position.

He used “Plain English”

The last will and testament of Mr. Daniel Martinett, of Calcutta, in the East Indies.

“In the name of God, I, Daniel Martinett, of the town of Calcutta, being in perfect mind and memory, though weak of body, make this my last Will and Testament in manner and form following.... To avoid Latin phrases, as it is a tongue I am not well versed in, ‘I shall speak in plain English.’

“First. In the most submissive manner I recommend my soul to Almighty God, &c.

“Secondly. Now as to worldly concerns, in the following manner:—As to this fulsome carcase having already seen enough of worldly pomp, I desire nothing relative to it to be done, only its being stowed away in my old green chest, to avoid expense; for as I lived profusely, I die frugally.

“Thirdly. The undertaker’s fees come to nothing, as I won them from him at a game of billiards, in the presence of Mr. Thomas Morrice and William Perkes, at the said William Perkes’ house, in February last. I furthermore request, not only as it is customary, but as I sincerely believe the prayers of the good availeth, and are truly consistent with decency, that the Rev. Mr. Henry Butler read the prayers which are customary at burials, and also preach a sermon on Sunday next after my decease, taking his text from Solomon, “All is vanity.” In consideration of which, over and above his fees, I bestow upon him all my hypocrisy, which he wants as a modern good man; but as my finances are low, and cannot conveniently discharge his fees, I hope he will please accept the will for the deed.

“Fourthly. To Henry Vansittart, Esq., Governor of Bengal, as an opulent man, I leave the discharge of all such sums of money (the whole not exceeding 300 rupees) that I shall stand indebted to indigent persons in the town of Calcutta.

“Fifthly. To Mr. George Grey, Secretary to the Presidency, I bequeath all my sincerity.

“Sixthly. To Mr. Simon Drose, Writer to the Secretary’s office, all my modesty.

“Seventhly. To Mr. Henry Higgenson, also of the Secretary’s office, all the thoughts I hope I shall die possessed of.

“Eighthly. To Mr. Thomas Forbes, all the worldly assurance which I had when I had taken a cheerful glass, though in fact a doleful cup.

“Ninthly. My wearing apparel, furniture, books, and everything else I die possessed of, I bequeath to them who stand most in need of them, leaving it to the discretion of my executor, Mr. Edward Gulston, excepting the things after mentioned:—Unto Capt. Edward Menzies, late commander of the ship Hibernia, I give my sea quadrant, invented by Hadley, and made by Howell, in the Strand; likewise my two-feet Gunter’s scale. These I give him because I believe he knows the use of them better than any commander out of this port.

“My silver watch and buckles I give to Mr. Edward Gulston, in lieu of his sincere friendship to me during our acquaintance; and these I hope he will not part with, unless his necessities require it, which I sincerely hope will never be the case.

“Also to Mr. Thomas Forbes I give my gold ring with a blue stone set therein, which he may exchange for a mourning one if he pleases.

“I give my Bible and Prayer-book to the Rev. Mr. Henry Butler.

“My sword, with a cut-and-thrust blade, I give to Capt. Ransulie Knox, as I verily believe he not only knows how, but has courage to use it, and I hope only in a good cause.

“As I have lived the make-game of a modern gentleman, being a butt for envy and a mark for malice, by acting a little out of the common road, though, thank God, never in a base way, I hope I may die in sincere love and charity to all men, forgiving all my persecutors, as I hope for forgiveness from my Creator.

“As it lies not in my power to bequeath anything to my relations at home, I shall say nothing concerning them, as they have not for these six years past concerned themselves about me; excepting that I heartily wish them all well, and that my brothers and sisters may make a more prosperous voyage through this life than I have done.

“(Signed) Daniel Martinett.”

This original and singular will was deposited in the Registry Office at Calcutta, Bengal, after the death of the testator, which took place in 1825: the governor of Bengal generously accepted the equivocal legacy of debts and paid them. Mr. Martinett was an officer of the well-known East India Company.

Had a Clamorous Tongue

Mr. Lewis Evan Morgan, an old Welsh gentleman, died at Gwyllgyth, in Glamorganshire, in the ninety-eighth year of his age. His will is neatly comprised in few words very much to the purpose: “I give to my old faithful servant, Ester Jones, the whole that I am possessed of either in personal property, land, or otherwise. She is a tolerable good woman, but would be much better if she had not so clamorous a tongue. She has, however, one great virtue, which is a veil to all her foibles—strict honesty.”

Hated Lawyers

General Hawley, who drew up his own will “because of the hatred and suspicion with which I regard all lawyers,” left “£100 to my servant Elizabeth Buskett because she has proved herself a useful and agreeable handmaid.” The rest of his belongings he bequeathed to his adopted son, but provided that, if he should be foolish enough to marry the said Elizabeth, neither was to inherit a farthing.

He desired his executors to consign his “carcase” to any place they pleased, and if the parish priest should claim a burial fee, they were to “let the puppy have it.”

A Pedler and his Dog

In the window at the west end of the nave at St. Mary’s, Lambeth, in London, may be seen a singular group representing a pedler with a pack on his back followed by a dog. Its age is not known, but it was there at the end of the sixteenth century. It is connected with a piece of land called Pedler’s Acre, anciently known as Church Hopys, which is entered in the parish register as bequeathed by a person unknown. A tradition preserved in the locality states that this isthmus was given to the parish to hold as long as the representation of himself and his dog was preserved in the church window.

His Brothers, Washington and Bonaparte

A resident of an Eastern State, who died recently, reflects in his will that he was shunned by his relatives, “who cannot, now that I am dying, do too much for my comfort.” But the testator, one Dr. Wagner, takes on these relations a ghastly revenge. To his brother, Napoleon Bonaparte, he bequeathed his left arm and hand; to another brother, George Washington, his right arm and hand; and to others his legs, nose, ears, etc. Further, the testator leaves a thousand dollars for the dismembering of his body.

Will written on a Door

An eccentric testator, having been told that so long as the proper formalities required by the law of wills were complied with it was immaterial whether the said will were written on paper, parchment, canvas, or wood, elected to write his on his door. The executors had therefore no choice but to have the door unscrewed from its hinges and carried into court for probate before it could be administered. The author has not been able to locate the court in which this rather weighty will was probated, but its existence is well authenticated.

On a Card torn from a Freight Car

A strange document was recently filed as a will in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Robert J. McElroy, after being fatally injured by a freight train, scribbled on a card torn from a freight car: “Mary, all that is mine is thine.” The will left an estate of $5200 to his wife. After writing the will, McElroy signed the letter “R,” but was unable to finish, and other trainmen completed the signature. McElroy died on June 12, 1910.

His Will on Wrapping-paper

Joseph Dwyer of Weymouth, Massachusetts, died in October, 1910. His will was probated in the Norfolk County Court at Dedham. This will was unusual in that it was written on a piece of grocer’s brown wrapping-paper. Under it he gave to his wife an estate valued at $50,000. The will was held to be valid.

Will on a Collar Box

Nicholas Zimmer was a passenger on the steamer, Kaiser Wilhelm der Grosse, on a voyage from a European port to the United States, in October, 1910.

In mid-ocean, he mysteriously disappeared and undoubtedly jumped overboard. He was last seen on October 1, 1910, and his non-appearance at meals the following day led to a search of his cabin. Under a steamer rug was found a collar box, on the lid of which was written his last will and testament. A search of his papers disclosed that he was sixty years of age and an American.

During the voyage, he had spoken to many of his fellow-passengers, and had made friends with some of the stewards. He had in no wise acted strangely.

The will written on the lid of the collar box bequeathed seven hundred dollars in cash and ten thousand dollars in securities to his wife. This amount of cash, and the securities, were found in the box. When the steamer reached her dock, the government officials boarded the vessel, received the box and forwarded it to Mrs. Zimmer.

Three-word Will Invalid

Recently, the Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia rejected the will of the late George T. Smith, of Richmond, which was composed of three words, “Everything is Lou’s,” in the suit of Samuel H. Smith, appellant, against Loula G. Smith.

These three words were written on a page of a book issued by the Southern Railroad Company to its employees for keeping records on trains.

The court held that such an instrument was not entitled to probate.

Man must dress in Female Attire

Money is so generally welcome that it is hardly conceivable that a legacy in cash would ever be refused. Occasionally, however, as a result of the absurdity or harshness of the conditions attached to legacies, substantial bequests of this kind have been declined. An Englishman refused a legacy of two hundred pounds because it was stipulated that before receiving it he must walk down the most important street of a fashionable summer resort (Brighton) “dressed in female attire.”

A Lion Sermon

Sir John Gayer, a citizen of London, and lord mayor upwards of 200 years ago, left by will some money to provide for a sermon, which is preached at the Church of St. Katharine Cree, Leadenhall Street, every October, in commemoration of his being saved from a lion on the coast of Africa, in answer to prayer.

What’s in a Name

A gentleman named Furstone of Alton Hampshire, England, about to make his will, and having no family, left seven thousand pounds to any man legitimately bearing the name of Furstone, who should discover and marry a female Furstone. If the marriage should result in children, the sum was to descend to the male offspring, if any, or to any child or children of the opposite sex who should, after marriage, retain the name.

Would not speak to the Legatee

In 1772, John Edmunds, Esq., of Monmouth, England, bequeathed a fortune of upwards of twenty thousand pounds to one Mills, a day laborer, residing near Monmouth. Mr. Edmunds, who had so handsomely provided for this man, would not speak to or see him while he lived.

Only our Saviour could demand It

Recently a cynical old man in a Western town died, who in his will devised all his property to that man in the community who could prove that he was a Christian. Then a definition of a Christian was given, which would exclude every one who had lived on earth, except the Saviour himself: the will was promptly set aside and the property given to the legal heirs.

To throw Dice for Bibles

A dissenting minister bequeathed a sum of money to his chapel at St. Ives, to provide “six Bibles every year, for which six men and six women are to throw dice on Whit Tuesday after the morning service, the minister kneeling the while at the south end of the communion table, and praying God to direct the luck to His glory.”

To a Hero or his Mistresses

A somewhat puzzling task devolved upon a real or imaginary body of men in Pennsylvania. A Mr. Smith Willie, in 1880, appointed as executors of his extraordinary will, a jury of honor consisting of all the householders in his native town, who could prove that they came honestly by their fortunes, each to receive for his trouble the sum of two hundred dollars. He computed that there could not be above twenty, and doubted whether that number would be reached.

The will itself is thus indited:

“Seeing that I have no direct descendants, and that I am wholly unacquainted with those I may possess collaterally, I bequeath my fortune to any one among them who, in the course of a twelve-month from the date of my death, may distinguish himself by an act of heroism worthy of ancient times.

“In case none of my collateral descendants should be justified in making this claim, I then leave all I possess to be divided between all the women who can prove that they have been my mistresses, be it for ever so brief a period.”

Imposed on the Nuns

A sick traveller once presented himself at the hospital of Auxerre, in France, where he was received and treated with the care and attention bestowed on all the sick who seek an asylum there. He expressed his gratitude for the kindness shown him, and his intention of testifying it in a more substantial manner, begging the nuns to let him see a notary.

This functionary having obeyed his summons, he informed him that, as an old soldier, he was in the enjoyment of a retiring-pension, and, having earned a medal, of a further allowance; that, in addition to this income, he owned a mortgage worth four thousand five hundred francs, of which the title, as well as his other papers, was deposited with the notary of the commune of the DÉpartement du Seine et Marne, where he had a settlement. Upon this he dictated to him a will, by which he bequeathed everything to the hospital, upon the sole condition that they should give him a decent and honorable burial.

At this time he appeared to be recovering, but suddenly his state became worse, and on the following day he died.

To fulfil the promise exacted from them, the administrators of the hospital, instead of supplying the simple funeral ordinarily accorded to the paupers who died there, responded liberally to the behest of their generous benefactor, and accompanied his interment with every mark of respect, after which they went to the office indicated to claim the inheritance bestowed on them. But here a new feature appeared in the case. The mayor and the notary of the parish indicated, expressed themselves entirely ignorant whether of the papers in question or of the singular testator, and on further inquiry they discovered him to be no more than a wretched cowherd, bearing in his neighborhood a very suspicious character. What his motive could have been in practising this deception in his dying moments it is difficult to guess, and his conduct remains an instance of one of those crookednesses of the human mind we often meet with, but do not understand.

Leaves Estate to Jesus

One of the most unique wills ever recorded, was filed recently in Worcester, Massachusetts. The testator, Charles Hastings, leaves several garden lots and buildings, valued at fifty thousand dollars, to the Lord Jesus, with the explanation that He is the rightful owner of all lands, according to the Bible, the first book of Laws.

The instrument is an odd mixture of a deed and a will, and was drawn twenty-five years ago. According to the probate records, the instrument was given in consideration of the love and goodwill of the Lord and one cent found in one of the buildings conveyed.

There was a reservation in the instrument, giving the grantor the right to use the lands for life, and to improve and repair the houses and to pay taxes and insurance.

It may be safely surmised that the title to this property will vest in the heirs of the testator.

Mr. Hastings was a resident of Ashburnham and a well-known citizen.

A Spirit Will

A spirit will was rejected in Washington, D.C., on August 12th, 1910, by Justice Barnard of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia.

Mrs. Elida J. G. Crowell, widow of William H. Crowell, a clerk in the Treasury Department, applied to the court for the appointment of the deceased’s brother as administrator of his estate and offered in evidence what purported to be a translation of an illegible message, which Crowell scribbled while on his deathbed, favoring his brother’s appointment.

The court was unable to decipher the scrawl, but Mrs. Crowell said a “translation” had been made for her by a “slate-writing medium.” The “translation” in part read:

“Dear Elida,—

“This is what I tried to write on a slip of paper: ‘I want my brother, W. H. H. Crowell, Washington, U. S. A., if I should pass away with my sickness. I have perfect trust in him. I believe he will deal honestly with my children. I have set aside $5000 for the exclusive use of my wife. Give little Elizabeth and brother both $100 to put in the Savings Bank.’ Ruby met me. I have seen many folk here. This is a beautiful world. Is better than the Sixth Auditor’s office. They can’t put me out here.

“W. H. Crowell.

“Date, June 7, 1910.”

Mystery of a Little Trunk

On September 1st, 1910, Adolph Steinberg, an old German cobbler, died in Brooklyn, New York, at 36 Snyder Avenue. For a quarter of a century he had half-soled and mended shoes for those who lived in that section of the city. Mayor Gaynor was one of his customers, and many other prominent men used to go to his little shop to have their shoes repaired.

There always lay close to Steinberg’s feet, as he stitched away, a little metal trunk that was never out of his sight a moment during the day. It was never open, and no one ever caught a glimpse of its contents. At night it was placed under Steinberg’s bed, and in the morning he would pull it out and drag it over to his bench.

Steinberg’s solicitude for the trunk finally caused comment among his customers, and the report got out that the old cobbler kept his money and valuables there, and that a snug fortune was locked up in the little box. It was known that Steinberg was well to do, and for many years he used to lend out money to people who were temporarily out of funds. In such cases, he would get them to leave a watch or some other article of value as security. When they called to repay, Steinberg would return their valuables, charging them no interest for the money loaned.

In the course of many years, Steinberg accumulated quite a collection of watches and trinkets, because many of those to whom he lent money never came back to claim their valuables. So the collection grew and grew.

By his will Steinberg directed that the trunk be not opened until thirty days after his death. His wife and children respected his wish, and much to their satisfaction found it contained securities and other property of considerable value, an accumulation of many years.

Dolly Varden Garters and other Matters

The following are extracts from some recent English wills: Thomas Blyth, after directing that no person was to wear mourning for him out of his money, goes on to say: “But I cannot forget the kindness of the ladies who have promised to wear Dolly Varden garters of black and white as a mark of respect for my memory.” William Hampton, after leaving to his son Lawrie’s “Interest Tables,” says he does so, “not from its intrinsic value, but from the hope that so small an incident may be of use to him in future years. And I particularly recommend to him the study of the compound interest tables, as showing that from comparatively small investments, by patience, large sums may be realized.” James Brown evidently believed in every man voting according to his own political convictions, for after leaving to a nephew two cottages, “for which he is to get his vote on,” adds, “and to vote the way which he likes best.” William Farren’s statement as to the character of Cambridge undergraduates is, we hope and believe, unfounded: he hopes by his disposition of his property, “to save his family from keeping or living in an undergraduate lodging-house, as undergraduates are more like wolves and dogs than human beings.”

Ostentation

Matthew Wall of Braughing, Hertfordshire, England, by will, in 1595, charged all his lands and tenements in the parish of Braughing with the yearly payment of twenty shillings, to be distributed by the minister and churchwardens on St. Matthew’s Day, in the following manner:

To the sexton, to make up his grave yearly, and to ring the bell, 1s. 10d. To twenty boys, between the age of six and sixteen, twenty groats. To ten aged and impotent people of the parish, ten threepences. To sweep the path from his house to the church-gate every year, 1s. To the crier of Stortford, to make proclamation yearly, on Ascension and Michaelmas Day, that he left his estate to a Matthew, or William Wall, as long as the world should endure, 8d. To the parish clerk at Hallingbury for the same, 8d., and to the minister and churchwardens, to see his will performed, 5s.

Powder Plot and Spanish Armada

Robert Wilcox, of Alcester, Warwickshire, England, by will, dated 24th of December, 1627, gave a house and grounds to the town of Alcester, for the maintenance of three sermons in the year, viz.:

“One upon the 5th of November, in remembrance of our happy deliverance, with our king, nobles and states, from the pestilent design of the Papists in the Powder Plot; one on the 17th of November, in remembrance of that good Queen Elizabeth, her entrance unto the Crown; and the third upon the last day of July, in remembrance of the Lord’s gracious deliverance from the Spanish Armada, in ’88.”

And whereas the rent was 20s. by the year then, and the good-wife, Lilly, having her life in it, after her decease no doubt the house and close would be worth 30s. by the year; then his will was that the said overplus should be given to the poor every year, as the rent should come in, forever.

More Generous than Polite

The will of Edward Wortley Montagu, son of Mr. Montagu, Ambassador to Constantinople in 1716, by Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, his wife, the supposed “Sappho” of Pope, is more than singular. After some bequest “to my noble and worthy relation, the Earl of ——,” he adds, “I do not give his lordship any further part of my property because the best part of that he has contrived to take already. Item, to Sir Francis —— I give one word of mine, because he has never had the good fortune to keep his own. Item, to Lord M—— I give nothing, because I know he’ll bestow it on the poor. Item, to —— the author, for putting me in his travels, I give five shillings for his wit, undeterred by the charge of extravagance, since friends who have read his book consider five shillings too much. Item, to Sir Robert W—— I leave my political opinions, never doubting he can well turn them into cash, who has always found such an excellent market in which to change his own. Item, my cast-off habit of swearing oaths I give to Sir Leopold D——, in consideration that no oaths have ever been able to find him yet.”

From some quarrel with his family he advertised for some widow or single lady of good manners likely to bring him an heir in —— months. This treasure to his arms his valet brought by his desire to meet him at Venice, from England; but as the ship of Wortley Montagu was entering the Venetian lagunes, to wed the chaste bride on the following day, the eager and expectant bridegroom swallowed too hastily a chicken bone, which, sticking in his throat, suffocated him in a few minutes.

To encourage Matrimony and Horse-racing

By a deed, dated 12th of August, 1801, executed in pursuance of a decree in Chancery, relative to the will of John Perram of New Market, England, dated 30th of May, 1772, the trustees of a sum of £410 6s. 2d. Three Per Cent Consols and £21 Bank Long Annuities, being the original sum given by the will, together with such accumulations thereon which had accrued during the proceedings in Chancery, were declared; to hold them upon trust, six weeks at least before Easter, to cause notice to be given, as therein directed, that a marriage portion of £21 would be given to a parishioner of the said parish, who should, on Thursday in the Easter week, be married at the church to a woman belonging to it; neither party to be under twenty, nor to exceed twenty-five years of age, nor be worth £20; the trustees to attend in the vestry to receive claims, and pay the bequest to such couples as should be qualified to receive it. In case of two claims, the determination to be by ballot who should receive it. In case of no claimants, then the money, for that year only, to be paid by the trustees to the winner of the next town horse-race; the race course at New Market is four miles long and is regarded the finest in the world.

Bequests of the Human Brain

Both in France and the United States there exist medical societies which make a special study of the human brain. In the United States a regular blank form of testamentary bequest has been formulated, and the brains of a number of prominent persons, particularly those of doctors, have passed under its provisions; a form used is here given:

“I, ——, of ——, recognizing the need of studying the brains of educated and orderly persons rather than those of the ignorant, criminal or insane, in order to determine their weight, form, and fissural patterns, the correlations with bodily and mental powers of various kinds and degrees, and the influences of sex, age and inheritance, hereby declare my wish, that at my death, my brain shall be entrusted to the Cornell Brain Association, or to the Curator of the Collection of human brains, in the Museum of Cornell University, for scientific uses, and for preservation, as a whole or in part, as may be thought best. If my near relatives, by blood or marriage, object seriously to the fulfilment of this bequest, it shall be void. I earnestly hope that they may interpose neither objection nor obstacle.

“——.

Date ——
Witnesses:
————
————”

Medical works state that college professors are among the individuals best adapted to subserve the purposes indicated, by reason of their sharply defined capacities and attainments; lawyers, doctors and preachers seem to come next in favor.

It will be recalled that the late Florence Nightingale by will left her body for dissection and the cause of medical science.

Must settle Disputes

Mrs. Susan M. Corning died recently at Rockaway Beach, New York, leaving an estate valued at several thousand dollars. By an unusual clause in her will she appointed an arbitration committee to pass upon any dispute which might arise in the distribution of her estate. The clause reads:

“It is my express will and wish and I hereby order and direct that if any differences shall arise concerning any gift, bequest or other thing in this will, no suit shall be brought over the same, but the said difference shall be referred wholly to George Bennett, Louis Kreusher and Albert Meisel, all of Rockaway Beach, and what they order and direct shall be binding and conclusive to all persons concerned.”

There seems some reason to question the legality of such a provision.

Long on Trousers

A New Yorker dying in 1880 supposed to be sane, left this will:

“I bequeath all my fortune to my nephews and nieces, seven in number.

“They are to share it equally, and on no account to go to law about it, on pain of forfeiting their respective shares.

“I own seventy-one pairs of trousers, and I strictly enjoin my executors to hold a public sale at which these shall be sold to the highest bidder, and the proceeds distributed to the poor of the city.

“I desire that these garments shall in no way be examined or meddled with, but be disposed of as they are found at the time of my death; and no one purchaser is to buy more than one pair.”

As the testator had always been more or less eccentric in his ways, no one was much surprised at these singular clauses, which were religiously observed. The sale was held, and the seventy-one pairs of trousers were sold to seventy-one different purchasers. One of these, in examining the pockets, discovered in the fob a packet of some sort, closely sewn up. He lost no time in cutting the thread, and was not a little surprised to find a bundle of bank-notes representing a thousand dollars. The news soon spread, and each of the others found himself possessed of a similar amount.

As may be supposed, all were well satisfied except the heirs, who could not find redress in law, this recourse being prohibited.

Complication over Horses

In a celebrated case, frequently quoted, the testator bequeathed to the plaintiff, “all my black and white horses.” Now the testator had six black horses, six white horses and six pied horses, and the question was whether the pied horses passed under the terms of the bequest. After elaborate argument, judgment was given for the plaintiff, and then it was moved in arrest of judgment that the pied horses were mares.

Must marry “Anton” or “Antonie”

An eccentric Frenchman left his estate to his six nephews and six nieces on the condition that “every one of my nephews marries a woman named Antonie and that every one of my nieces marries a man named Anton.” They were further required to give the Christian name Antonie or Anton to every first-born child according to the sex. The marriage of each nephew was to be celebrated on one of the St. Anthony’s Days, either January 17th, May 10th, or June 13th, and if, in any instance, this last provision was not complied with before July, 1896, one-half of the legacy was in that case to be forfeited.

Must sing Anthems

Elizabeth Townsend of Westbury, Wilts, England, widow, by her will, dated 11th of June, 1820, gave unto the churchwardens and overseers of the parish of Westbury as much money as should be sufficient, when invested in the stocks, to yield the yearly sum of £3 clear of all deductions, upon trust to pay the dividends thereof unto the vicar, organist, parish clerk, and choir of the parish church of Westbury, for the time being, upon special condition that the said choir should forever thereafter, in the morning and afternoon service, at the parish church, on the Sunday preceding the 24th of June in each year, sing the anthem composed by her late husband’s grandfather, Roger Townsend, from the 150th Psalm, and also the 112th Psalm, for which the vicar was to have 4s., the organist 10s., the clerk 5s., and 4s. apiece to the choir singers, viz., two counter, two tenor, three treble, and three bass singers, and in default of their singing, then to divide such £3 amongst the poor at Christmas.

The same person made a similar bequest to the choir of the parish church of Warminster, Wilts.

Will of Dr. Dunlop

The humorous will of Dr. Dunlop of Upper Canada is worth recording, though there is a spice of malice in every bequest it contains.

To his five sisters he left the following bequests:

“To my eldest sister Joan, my five-acre field, to console her for being married to a man she is obliged to henpeck.

“To my second sister Sally, the cottage that stands beyond the said field with its garden, because as no one is likely to marry her it will be large enough to lodge her.

“To my third sister Kate, the family Bible, recommending her to learn as much of its spirit as she already knows of its letter, that she may become a better Christian.

“To my fourth sister Mary, my grandmother’s silver snuff-box, that she may not be ashamed to take snuff before company.

“To my fifth sister, Lydia, my silver drinking-cup, for reasons known to herself.

“To my brother Ben, my books, that he may learn to read with them.

“To my brother James, my big silver watch, that he may know the hour at which men ought to rise from their beds.

“To my brother-in-law Jack, a punch-bowl, because he will do credit to it.

“To my brother-in-law Christopher, my best pipe, out of gratitude that he married my sister Maggie whom no man of taste would have taken.

“To my friend John Caddell, a silver teapot, that, being afflicted with a slatternly wife, he may therefrom drink tea to his comfort.”

While “old John’s” eldest son was made legatee of a silver tankard, which the testator objected to leave to old John himself, lest he should commit the sacrilege of melting it down to make temperance medals.

Vanity follows us to the Grave

John Troutbeck of Dacre, Cumberland, England, by will, dated 27th of October, 1787, gave to the poor of Dacre, the place of his nativity, £200, the interest thereof to be distributed every Easter Sunday on the family tombstone in Dacre churchyard, provided the day should be fine, by the hands and at the discretion of a Troutbeck of Blencowe, if there should be any living, those next in descent having prior right of distribution; and if none should be living that would distribute the same, then by a Troutbeck, as long as one could be found that would take the trouble of it; otherwise by the minister and churchwardens of the parish for the time being; that not less than five shillings should be given to any individual, and that none should be considered entitled to it that received alms, or any support from the parish.

Temperance and Early Rising enjoined

In the will of the late Mr. J. Sargeant, of Leicester, England, who died some forty years ago, is the following clause: “As my nephews are fond of indulging themselves in bed in the morning, and as I wish them to prove to the satisfaction of my executors that they have got out of bed in the morning, and either employed themselves in business or taken exercise in the open air, from five to eight o’clock every morning from the fifth of April to the 10th of October, being three hours every day, and from seven to nine o’clock in the morning from the 10th of October to the 5th of April, being two hours every morning; this is to be done for some years, during the first seven years to the satisfaction of my executors, who may excuse them in case of illness, but the task must be made up when they are well, and if they will not do this, they shall not receive any share of my property. Temperance makes the faculties clear, and exercise makes them vigorous. It is temperance and exercise that can alone ensure the fittest state for mental or bodily exertion.”

Picture of a Viper as a Bequest

The following is an extract from the will of John Hylett Stow, proved in 1781:

“I hereby direct my executors to lay out five guineas in the purchase of a picture of the viper biting the benevolent hand of the person who saved him from perishing in the snow, if the same can be bought for the money; and that they do, in memory of me, present it to ——, Esq., a king’s counsel, whereby he may have frequent opportunities of contemplating it, and, by a comparison between that and his own virtue, be able to form a certain judgment which is best and most profitable, a grateful remembrance of past friendship and almost parental regard, or ingratitude and insolence. This I direct to be presented to him in lieu of a legacy of three thousand pounds I had by a former will, now revoked and burned, left him.”

This will provoked a suit for libel, a proceeding not altogether unknown, for defamation contained in a testamentary document, though such proceedings are rare. Mr. John Marshall Gest of Philadelphia refers to this clause in his excellent address on “Practical Suggestions for Writing Wills.” It is also to be found in the “Curiosities of the Search Room,” an English work of the highest merit.

No Cruelty to Animals

Grates v. Fraser. This was a suit for the administration of the estate of the late Dr. Fraser, of Hampstead, England, who left a large amount of property to be distributed among various charities. The will, probated in 1878, contained several very singular clauses, one of which was to this effect: That he had previously left ten thousand pounds to the Senatus Academicus of the University of Edinburgh, for the purpose of founding certain bursaries connected with the medical profession, but having learnt that the horrible and atrocious practice prevailed there of performing unspeakably cruel operations and experiments on living animals, he now by his will cancelled the bequest, and desired to benefit the Scottish Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to a similar extent, since he could not reconcile it with his feelings to encourage, however remotely, the barbarous practice of vivisection. The testator also directed that his funeral should be conducted with as little parade as possible, without cloaks, hatbands, or scarfs, and that no feathers, wands, or other absurdities should be used on the occasion, and that the ridiculous display of hired mourners, mutes, or attendants, be dispensed with. Most sensible people, he continued, condemn the above useless customs, but nevertheless, from vanity or in blind obedience to antiquated usages, perpetuate and encourage them. He then directed his body to be buried in any cemetery, without reference to its being what was called “consecrated” or “unconsecrated” ground, or whether any service should be repeated at the grave or not, as these were matters about which he was utterly indifferent; they could avail him nothing, but might, if the weather were cold, cause the health of some friend to suffer.

Whiskey to exterminate the Irish

An English gentleman, who had from his earliest years been educated with the most violent prejudices against the Irish, came, when advanced in life, to inherit a considerable property in the county of Tipperary, but under the express condition that he should reside on the land. To this decree he very reluctantly conformed, but his feelings towards the natives only grew more bitter in consequence.

At his death some years after, on the 17th of March, 1791, his executors were extremely surprised on opening his will to find the following dispositions:

“I give and bequeath the annual sum of ten pounds, to be paid in perpetuity out of my estate, to the following purpose. It is my will and pleasure that this sum shall be spent in the purchase of a certain quantity of the liquor vulgarly called whisky, and it shall be publicly given out that a certain number of persons, Irish only, not to exceed twenty, who may choose to assemble in the cemetery in which I shall be interred, on the anniversary of my death, shall have the same distributed to them. Further, it is my desire that each shall receive it by half-a-pint at a time till the whole is consumed, each being likewise provided with a stout oaken stick and a knife, and that they shall drink it all on the spot. Knowing what I know of the Irish character, my conviction is, that with these materials given, they will not fail to destroy each other, and when in the course of time the race comes to be exterminated, this neighbourhood at least may, perhaps, be colonized by civilized and respectable Englishmen.”

Must wait One Hundred Years

A very curious will was that of a Polish landlord, M. Zalesky, who died in 1889, leaving property valued at one hundred thousand roubles. His will was enclosed in an envelope bearing the words: “To be opened after my death.” Inside there was another envelope, “To be opened six weeks after my death.” When this time had passed, the second envelope was opened, and a third uncovered, “To be opened one year after my death.” At the end of the year, a fourth envelope was discovered, to be opened two years after the testator’s death; and so the game went on until 1894, when the actual will was discovered and read. The contents of this will were quite as eccentric as the directions attached to its opening. The testator bequeathed half his fortune to such of his heirs as had the largest number of children. The rest of the property was to be placed in bank, and a hundred years after his death to be divided, with the accumulated interest, among the will-maker’s descendants.

Will of an Irish Miser

An Irishman named Dennis Tolam, who died at Cork possessed of considerable wealth, in the year 1769, left a singular will, containing the following testamentary dispositions: “I leave to my sister-in-law four old stockings, which will be found under my mattress, to the right. Item: To my nephew, Michael Tarles, two odd socks and a green nightcap. Item: To Lieutenant John Stein, a blue stocking, with my red cloak. Item: To my cousin, Barbara Dolan, an old boot, with a red flannel pocket. Item: To Hannah, my housekeeper, my broken water-jug.” After the death of the testator, the legatees having been convened by the notary to be present at the reading of the will, each, as he or she was named, shrugged their shoulders and otherwise expressed a contemptuous disappointment, while parties uninterested in the succession could not refrain from laughing at these ridiculous, not to say insulting, legacies. All were leaving the room, after signifying their intention of renouncing their bequests, when the last-named, Hannah, having testified her indignation by kicking away the broken pitcher, a number of coins rolled out of it; the other individuals, astonished at the unexpected incident, began to think better of their determination, and requested permission to examine the articles given to them. It is needless to say that, on proceeding to the search, the stockings, socks, pocket, etc., soon betrayed by their weight the value of their contents; and the hoard of the testator, thus fairly distributed, left on the minds of the legatees a very different impression of his worth.

Must not marry a Domestic Servant

A curious and peculiarly hard case came before a Vice-Chancellor in London in 1880. The facts are as follows: A Miss Turner devised a large amount of real estate to her father for life, and then to her brother on these conditions: “But if my brother shall marry during my life without my consent in writing, or if he shall already have married, or hereafter shall marry, a domestic servant,” then such bequest to her brother was to be void. It appears the brother came into possession of the estate and died in 1898, leaving a widow and two children. Suit was instituted against the widow and children on the ground that the testatrix’s brother had forfeited his title to the legacy by marrying a domestic servant. It was contended on behalf of the widow that she had been a housekeeper, and not a domestic servant. The Vice-Chancellor, however, was of the opinion that a housekeeper was a domestic servant, and thus the legacy was forfeited.

To Sing in Opera

Stanislas Poltzmarz, a Hungarian, possessed of considerable wealth, and residing at Pesth, died about 1835, bequeathing the larger part of his fortune, consisting of three million florins, to a notary named Lotz, but stipulated that before claiming it he should engage himself at the Scala at Milan, to perform in the operas of “Otello” and “La Sonnambula.” The testator, who was eighty years of age, deprecates being considered in his dotage, and takes the trouble to explain that, having some few years before met the said Lotz at an evening party, where he had sung fragments of the parts of Elvino and Otello, he had admired the beauty of his tenor voice, and predicted that it only depended on himself to become the favorite of the whole musical world. “If, therefore,” he concludes, “I am right, he will thank me, and so will all dilettanti, for my acumen; if, on the other hand, he should fail, he will have money enough to compensate for the hisses he may incur.”

Hair of the Prophet’s Beard

“The Prophet’s Beard Case,” which created a sensation among the followers of the Prophet at Madras, was called on for final disposal before Mr. Justice Innes, Acting Chief Justice, in August, 1879. The subject of dispute was a hair of the Prophet’s beard, which is enclosed in a case and is called the “Aussaree Shareef,” or sacred relic, and in connection with which the Government allows a monthly pension of Rs. 47-14-4, obtained from funds left by a late Nabob for the purpose of carrying out ceremonies in connection with the sacred relic. There were, when the case was first instituted, no less than six claimants, two by right of a will, the others claiming it in succession from generations. Two of the claimants and the plaintiff withdrew from the suit, leaving only four to establish their rights to the sacred heirloom. His lordship, in a lengthy judgment, decided that the first, third, and fourth defendants were entitled to the sacred relic; but as the first defendant was a woman she could not hold office in connection with it, and as No. 3 was the elder brother of No. 4, he directed that he should hold the “Aussaree Shareef,” and perform all ceremonies in connection with it, making three equal shares of whatever remained from the allowance after their performance.

Joke on his Friends

Mr. Arbirlot, a Scotch gentleman, left extremely handsome legacies to a number of his friends. The lawyer who wrote down his wishes, looked up from time to time to ascertain whether his client could be in earnest; at last he could not refrain from asking him whether he was sure his assets would cover all these bequests. At this the humorous testator burst out laughing, admitting that of course they wouldn’t, only he didn’t like to go out of the world without leaving the expression of his regard for these legatees, by showing what he would have done for them if he had had the means. No doubt the intention was a benevolent one; but we doubt whether the joke was one calculated to be received in a spirit of affectionate gratitude, especially by the executors, whose equanimity would have been put to a severe test had the puzzle not been explained before the testator’s death.

A Remarkable Annuity

A county newspaper some years ago recorded the death of a Major Hook, and spoke of him as “a singular character.” “He died,” says the report, “on Monday sennight, at his house, Ham Street, Ham Common. He was an officer in the East India Company’s service, and reached the age of seventy-five. His house was remarkable for its dingy and dilapidated condition.”

His wife had become entitled to a life annuity, bequeathed to her in these ambiguous terms: “And the same shall be paid to her as long as she is above ground.” When, therefore, the good lady died, her husband very naturally objected to forfeit this income by putting her below ground; and ingeniously devised a mode of keeping her in a room which he allotted “to her sole and separate use,” placing a glass-case over her remains. For thirty years he thus prolonged his enjoyment, if not of his wife’s society, at least of her income.

To help Young Newspaper Men

William J. Haskett, a lawyer, who died in New York in 1890, left a will containing this curiously worded clause: “I am informed that there is a society composed of young men connected with the public press; and as in early life I was connected with the papers, I have a keen recollection of the toils and troubles that bubbled then and ever will bubble for the toilers of the world in their pottage caldron; and as I desire to thicken with a little savory herb their thin broth in the shape of a legacy, I do hereby bequeath to the New York Press Club of the City of New York, $1000, payable on the death of Mrs. Haskett.”

Angelic Virtue Required

Not long ago, a wealthy gentleman on Long Island died, who provided that none of his heirs should inherit, unless they could show that they had led a life of angelic virtue. Among the conditions mentioned, were these: That they should not smoke or drink; that they should rise every morning and breakfast at a certain hour; that they should be in the house every evening at a certain hour; that they should be industrious and strictly moral; that they should never enter a barroom, and should not get married before the age of twenty-five. It is stated that the heirs were practically disinherited, all but one having failed to live up to the conditions.

Bare Arms Immodest

A rector of a Yorkshire parish, who died in 1804, left a considerable property to his only daughter under the following conditions:

1st. That she should not marry unless with the consent of his two executors, and

2d. That she should dress with greater propriety than theretofore.

This clause was worded thus: “Seeing that my daughter Anna has not availed herself of my advice touching the objectionable practice of going about with her arms bare up to the elbows, my will is that, should she continue after my death in this violation of the modesty of her sex, all the goods, chattels, moneys, land, and other property that I have devised to her for the maintenance of her future life shall pass to the oldest of the sons of my sister Caroline. Should anyone take exception to this my wish as being too severe, I answer that license in dress in a woman is a mark of a depraved mind.”

A Fanatical Baptist Minister

The will (dated March 26th, 1874) of the Rev. William Hill, late of Lansdowne Villas, Springfield Road, Cotham, Bristol, Baptist minister, who died on November 11, 1879, was proved at the district registry, Bristol, by Emerson Geerish and Thomas Bowbeer, the executors, under three thousand pounds. After the death of his wife he gives to the Society for the Relief of Aged and Infirm Baptist Ministers, instituted in Bath, 1816, and to the Baptist Foreign Missionary Society, each one hundred pounds. The testator directs “the payment of all my just debts, funeral and testamentary expenses, as soon as conveniently may be after my departure to heaven; but, as this is to be my final public document, I shall here record my detestation of all State establishments of religion, believing them to be anti-scriptural and soul-ruining. I have for years prayed the King of Zion to overthrow the politico-ecclesiastical establishment of the British Empire, and I leave the world with a full conviction that such prayer must ere long be answered. I thirst to see the Church brought down, the Church by man set up, for millions are by it led on to drink a bitter cup. I desire all posterity to know that William Hill was a conscientious Trinitarian Baptist Minister, and that he believed infant sprinkling to be from his Satanic Majesty, the keystone of Popery, therefore the parent of unnumbered terrible evils; this delusion must also pass away at the Divinely-appointed time, and the immersion of believers, as plainly taught by the Great Teacher, the Holy Ghost, and the Apostles, shall one day universally triumph. Man says, some water in the face, and that before the child has grace, is what is meant in Jesus’ word, by being buried in the Lord. The deadly drinking customs of professors and non-professors are likewise doomed. Heaven dash all error, sin, and the devil from the earth, and cause truth, holiness, and Christ everywhere to prevail. Amen.”

Three Testamentary Gems

The three testamentary gems following are to be found in one volume of the Pennsylvania State Reports:

NUMBER ONE

“February the 28, 1858.

her
Tereisse X carey”
mark

NUMBER TWO

NUMBER THREE

The third runs as follows: “it to be understood that any of my grandchildren who shall be guilty of having an illegitimate child, or of the sin of intemperance, or that do wickedly and illegitimately profane God’s holy name, he, she, or they, to forever debar themselves from the benefit of any bequest,” and that the shares of offending ones should be divided amongst their brothers and sisters, “whose life and conversation is free from reproach.”

Claiming to be the Son of a King

One of the most singular cases that ever came before a court of justice was the dispute as to the validity of the will of the late Mr. W. R. Smee, probated in 1880 in England. That the testator was a man of exceptional ability is beyond doubt. His powers of organization were so good that he was employed by the Post Office authorities to readjust several departments which had got into a state of disorder. A pamphlet of his, on the question of the “Repeal of the Malt Duties,” attracted the attention of the acting Lord Chief Baron and Mr. Bass, who sought an interview with the writer; and after 1860 he wrote many able articles for various newspapers. At the same time, there is equally little doubt that Mr. Smee had insane delusions of the sort which most commonly afflict lunatics. He believed that he was a son of George IV, and rightful heir to the throne, and in 1859, before the composition of the articles just mentioned, he wrote a letter to the Prince Consort, enclosing a preposterous petition to the Queen on the subject of his “rights.” This absurd document stated that when out walking with his nurse he had been recognized by a crowd as the Prince of Wales, and escorted home amid loud hurrahs. The king had taken him on his royal knee, and said to him, “Poor boy, poor boy, get on with your learning. A great destiny is preparing for you, though you do not know it.” Every morning, he asserted, drugs were administered which took away his memory. The Duke of Wellington, disguised in a mechanic’s dress, followed him round Finsbury Circus; and, during his last illness, Mr. William Smee, senior, had said: “Extraordinary and unheard of means have been adopted to keep him down, or he must have come to the throne.” In his will the testator left his property to the corporation of Brighton, wishing to be associated with his supposed royal father as a benefactor to that town. As must have been generally expected, the Court pronounced against the will which benefited the popular seaside resort. “The fact that a man was capable of transacting business, to whatever extent that might go, however complicated the business might be, and however considerable the powers of intellect it might require, did not exclude the idea of his being of unsound mind,” the president stated in the course of his interesting judgment. “A man might be a good carpenter and follow his calling, and yet his mind might be tainted with insanity to such an extent that he might be held irresponsible for a crime on the ground that he did not know the nature of the act he committed. Therefore, all the arguments addressed to the jury on the subject of the testator’s capacity to deal with complex subjects, to write pamphlets, and to make calculations, had nothing to do with the question whether he was of unsound mind or not. He was admittedly of unsound mind, because shown by that which was the most conclusive symptom and evidence of unsoundness—namely, the presence of delusions—that was to say, ideas which they could not conceive any rational man entertaining.” These arguments do not tend to simplify the difficult duties of those who have the misfortune to be called upon to give advice in cases of mental disease.

A Word Left Out

Mary Richardson, who died on the 28th of May, 1874, made, by her will, numerous charitable bequests, amongst which was £500 to the “London Church Building Society.” There being no society in London bearing that title exactly, a petition was presented by the treasurers of the London Diocesan Church Building Society for the payment out of court of the bequest named. The Bishop of London’s fund likewise presented its claim; as also did the Incorporated Society for Promoting the Enlargement Building, and Repairing of Churches in England and Wales, the latter supposing that it most exactly answered the description of a London church building society. The Vice-Chancellor, however, Sir C. Hall, decided in favor of the London Diocesan Church Building Society, because the words used most nearly approached those of the title given by the testatrix.

An Enigma

WILL OF ROSINE BARROT

This is my last will and testament, made at Meude, 20th October, 1767.

Rosine Barrot.

As this was the entire will, without any clue whatever to its signification, the surviving relatives, for there were no executors appointed, set their wits to work to discover its enigmatic signification. At last they found that the testatrix’s property amounted to 75,000 francs, and they therefore concluded that each unit represented 1000. Another difficulty arose from the fact that there were in the family several repetitions of some of the names mentioned in the will. The decision, however, was worked out by common sense, and, strange to say, two trials at law that followed, failed to overthrow it.

Body bequeathed for Useful Purposes

A certain testator devised his property to a stranger, wholly disinheriting the heir or next of kin, and directed that his executors should “cause some part of his bowels to be converted into fiddle strings, and that others should be sublimed into smelling salts, and that the remainder of his body should be vitrified into lenses, for optical purposes.” In a letter attached to this will the testator said, “The world may think this to be done in a spirit of singularity or whim, but I have a mortal aversion to funeral pomp, and I wish my body to be converted into purposes useful to mankind.” The testator was shown to have conducted his affairs with great shrewdness and ability, and had been regarded by his associates through life as a person possessing high business qualifications, and the will was upheld.

Will contained a Sermon

Another unusual will showing a strong religious belief and which incorporates a sermon to his heirs, is that of Elias Boudinot which was probated in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, in 1821. The will contained twenty-six closely written pages of manuscript. The beginning of the will which contains the sermon is as follows:

“Know all men by these presents that I, Elias Boudinot, late of the city of Philadelphia, and director of the mint of the United States, but now of the city of Burlington, N.J., Doctor of Laws, being by the unmerited goodness of Almighty God, after great affliction, by a long series of bad health, and having passed my eighty-first year and returned to a tolerable state of bodily health, so as to possess a sound and disposing mind and memory; but being often reminded of the uncertainty of life and the propriety of settling the intended disposition of my property while free from the distresses of a sick bed, do make and publish this my last will and testament.

“And as this instrument cannot take effect till after my death, but must then be frequently resorted to by my representatives, I do therefore improve so good an opportunity of repeating the profession I have made for more than sixty years, and which by the free grace of God, through Jesus Christ, and by the continued influences of his Holy Spirit, has been strengthened and confirmed by the most happy experience, founded on solid ground and by a thorough examination and inquiry into the divine scriptures through that long period, and in which I hope under the same blessed influences to finish my mortal race, I mean that of a firm, unfeigned and prevailing belief in one sovereign, omnipotent and eternal Jehovah, a God of infinite love and mercy who hath delivered us from the powers of darkness and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son, in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins, who is the image of the invincible God, the first born of every creature, and he is before all things and by him all things consist, and whoever has been and still is reconciled a guilty world unto himself by his righteousness and atonement, his death and his resurrection, through whom alone life and immortality have been brought to light in his gospel, and by the all-powerful influence of his daily spirit, is daily sanctifying, enlightening and leading his faithful people into all necessary truth.

“And as it has pleased a holy and sovereign God to favor me with the continuance of one only child, to whom I most cordially wish and pray for the best and greatest possible good in time and eternity, I do in the most solemn manner, as in the presence of the one only great and glorious God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and in view of an approaching eternity, beseech and entreat her to make the fear and love of God the great objects of her constant attention and pursuit, and in a particular manner that she will by a persevering inquiry into, and a thorough knowledge of the spirit and power of the gospel of Jesus Christ, which she has been so long, and I trust through divine mercy savingly acquainted with, endeavor to cherish and increase the like temper, disposition and usefulness in life as are therein so clearly and plainly taught and enforced, and which, generally speaking, consist in an universal benevolence, meekness, self-denial, deep contrition for sin and unfeigned love to our brethren, with an habitual lively faith in and dependence upon our Lord Jesus Christ, as the only atonement for our sins, the source of every blessing, and when the gift of God will inevitably work by love, purify the heart and be productive of good works, always remembering that however the profession of a particular denomination of our holy religion among men may be beneficial to herself and others in their state of imperfection in which every aid should be sought to support and manifest the Christian character, yet that the Church of Christ is one universal and Catholic Church, a communion of saints not confined to time or place, name or party of Christians, but that every one who exercises deep and sincere repentance towards God, unfeigned faith in his beloved Son and worketh righteousness, is born of God.

“And I do more expressly press it upon her under every circumstance of life, to consider that day as worse than lost, in which she does not seek earnestly communion with her Heavenly Father under the special influence of His Holy Spirit, and she may be positively assured that this may be done even amidst the common and ordinary business of life as in the most profound and secret retirements, assisted by the ordinances of his gospel; would also earnestly recommend her habitually living under prevailing sense of God’s overruling providence, which, however wonderful, regards the smallest things of those who love and fear him, even to the numbering of the hairs of the heads.

“As to all and singular, the temporal estate wherewith it has pleased God in his undeserved mercy to amply reward my industry and application to business, for the use and enjoyment of which I do him my most grateful thanks, acknowledging his great goodness and beneficence to me therein, I do dispose of the same and all my estate therein in the following manner, wishing to do what I think by solemn and serious consideration, will not be contrary to his divine will, but in the end may advance the honor of his great name.”

Thereafter follow the bequests.

A Partnership with God

We might head this paper “Why Paul Duhalde made his Will,” for certainly no idea could be much more original than that on which its principal, and disputed, clause was founded.

A brief sketch of the history of Paul Duhalde cannot fail to interest our readers, and will best explain the peculiarity of this testamentary document.

This individual was born at Paris in 1691; he died in 1725; he was the son of a dealer in diamonds, and lost his father at the age of sixteen years, when he was sent to Spain by his mother to learn the arcana of the business. The lad had no success, and returned. He was then placed with a merchant at Rouen, but did not get on, and subsequently passed to America, but his restless disposition soon sent him back to France. This brought him to the year 1717, and he was now twenty-six years of age. He remained some months with his mother, and then, having contracted a partnership with two jewel merchants, set off a second time to Madrid; this enterprise was, however, not more successful than those preceding it, and he came back to Paris, in the month of February, 1719, profoundly discouraged, and not without reason.

Here the melancholy reflections consequent on his repeated and persistent failures suggested to him a very singular notion, that of contracting a partnership with God. He proceeded to enter seriously into this abnormal contract, and drew up an act in regular and technical form, which he transcribed into his day-book on September 24, 1719, in the following terms: “I have resolved to enter into a partnership with God, promising and undertaking to fulfil all the within-mentioned articles; and I enjoin my heirs, whoever they may be, to carry out these my intentions in case I should die before accomplishing them myself.”

He then proceeds to declare that this association, the object of which is to deal in precious stones, shall hold good for five years, reckoning from October 2, 1719. He fixes his capital at 3000 Spanish piastres, about $3000, being all that remained to him of his patrimony. He binds himself not to enter into any other partnership during the five years, unless with a woman, by marriage. As soon as the five years shall have elapsed, he proposes to balance his accounts, to begin by withdrawing from the partnership the 3000 piastres with which he started; secondly, to take from it the dowry that his wife may have brought him; thirdly, any sum or sums that may have fallen in to him by succession or otherwise during the time; after which he adds, “And the surplus shall be equally divided between God and myself.”

This unique partnership having been thus determined, Duhalde starts a third time for Spain, but the outset of this new attempt does not augur well for the partners. Two years after, however (1721), the project of a double marriage between the Courts of France and Spain gives a new impetus to the branch of commerce in which he is engaged, and he resolves to improve the opportunity. At last Fortune seems to smile upon his endeavors, and the ultimate results exceed his fondest hopes. He now returns to Paris, resolving to settle himself finally there.

In 1722 he married the daughter of De Hansy, a well-known bookseller, who brought him 30,000 livres, and from his mother, who died in September of the same year, he inherited 70,226 livres. On May 20, 1723, a son was born to him.

Meantime Duhalde never loses sight of the obligations he has taken upon himself toward his partner. He draws, from time to time, from the common fund, sums which he distributes in the name of God, to the poor, and inscribes these with regularity and precision in his registers.

On October 1, 1724, the partnership expires. Duhalde strikes a balance of his accounts, and finds from the aggregate of the entries that he has already paid to the poor 13,684 livres; but this is not all. In the statement of account drawn up he has considered three classes of stones as constituting a portion of the profits: one of these lots is at Amsterdam, one at Madrid, and one at Paris; these he shares equally, inscribing on the packets which contain them: “Half for the poor”; and at the foot of the statement of account he writes: “Misfortune and malediction upon my heirs, whoever they may be, if, under any pretext whatever, they should fail to distribute to the poor the half of whatever proceeds may come from the jewels now in my possession, if so be God should call me away before I shall have been able to satisfy their claims myself. Further, if by any extraordinary event it should appear at my death that no other amounts are forthcoming but those goods or sums which are virtually the property of the poor, let not a sacrilegious hand be laid upon them; they constitute a deposit which can under no circumstances be diverted from its just cause.”

In addition to this precaution, and in order to secure to the poor the amounts he regarded as strictly their due, Duhalde drew up in the month of January, 1725, eight bills of 1000 livres each, payable to order from year to year, comprising the years 1725 to 1732, and placed these bills in the hands of the Vicar of St. Germain l’Auxerrois.

On January 14, 1725, he fell ill and made his will, by which he declares that: “In the books which contain the minutes of my affairs there are several articles touching matters that concern the poor; I beg my executor to examine these articles with the greatest accuracy, and to see they are carried out with the strictest attention.”

Two months after, Duhalde dies, leaving a young widow, a minor, and an infant two years old. The schedule of property is called over, the administrators of the HÔpital GÉnÉral are invited to attend. Among the effects of the deceased are found packets of precious stones, labelled “Half for the poor”; their portion is estimated at 18,188 livres. The administrators claim it, but offer to compromise for the sum of 15,900 ff. The young widow protests; the guardian contends that the will should be set aside on the ground that no sane men ever enter into partnership with God. The parties appeal to law, and, after a spirited altercation, a judgment is obtained, April 3, 1726, on the decision of D’Aguesseau (Avocat-GÉnÉral), ordering that “The will of Duhalde and the acts and codicils dependent thereon shall be fulfilled according to the desire of the testator; he consequently condemns the guardian of the widow and her son to hand over to the administrators of the hospital funds the jewels constituting the legacy made by the testator to the poor, but leaving him the choice of paying the sum in money value, as estimated by experts to be provided by the Court; the course adopted by the said guardian to be decided on within a fortnight.”

Eccentric but Charitable Frenchman

A gentleman of French birth, named Pierre Henri Baume, died some years ago at Douglas, Isle of Man, leaving a large sum for charitable purposes. He was born at Marseilles in 1797, and at an early age was sent to a military college at Naples, where he became private secretary to King Ferdinand. About the year 1825 he came to London. At one time he was a preacher holding peculiar views on theology, then became manager of a theatrical company, and subsequently got up a scheme for the establishment of model gardens. He took a lively interest in various charitable institutions, and expressed a strong desire to accumulate a great fortune, with the object of eventually endowing or establishing an institution, on principles which he had himself drawn up, for the education and benefit of youth of the poorer classes. By great perseverance and industry, and by subjecting himself almost to privation, he at last succeeded in amassing a considerable fortune, and bought land at Colney-hatch, together with a small estate called Chifont, on Dibdin-hill, in Buckinghamshire. Several obstacles arose as to the fulfilment of his educational project, and he was ultimately induced to abandon this idea. After living about a quarter of a century in London, he went to Manchester and engaged vigorously in a movement “public-houses without drink.” He also instituted Sunday afternoon lectures to working-men, which were carried on with varying success for several years. In 1857 he settled in the Isle of Man, purchased an estate there, and afterwards resided on the island. At Douglas he fitted up an odd kind of residence, the entrance to which he made almost inaccessible, and admission to which could only be obtained by those whom he had initiated into a peculiar knock. In this little den he lived like a hermit, sleeping in a hammock slung from the roof, for the room was so crowded with dusty books that there was no space for a bedstead or even for a table on which to take his food. He stated that his object in living in this condition and depriving himself of all comforts was to enable him to leave as much money as possible for charitable and educational purposes. He resided in this miserable place for several years; but his health failing him, he was induced, later, to remove, and died at a tradesman’s house in Duke street, Douglas. Public attention was directed to M. Baume’s affairs in London, in consequence of proceedings taken by him to evict a number of squatters who had located themselves on his Colney-hatch property, which was popularly known as “The Frenchman’s Farm.” M. Baume took out letters of naturalization, which enabled him to enjoy the rights and privileges of an Englishman, and to dispose of his property as he thought best. He left the whole of his real and personal property, valued at £54,000, in trust for charitable purposes in the Isle of Man, on his death.

“Louis Agassiz, Teacher”

The will of Agassiz, probated in June, 1874, begins thus: “The last will and testament of Louis Agassiz, of Cambridge, in the County of Middlesex and Commonwealth of Massachusetts, teacher.”

Of him the Boston Globe said: “We should think the heart of every schoolmaster and schoolmistress in the land should bound at reading this simple announcement. The great naturalist, the peer of Aristotle, LinnÆus, Cuvier, and Von Baer, calls himself, in the most solemn of all documents, ‘a teacher.’ There is, to us, something inspiring in this designation. All teachers, whether they are professors in colleges or directors in the commonest village schools, must be thrilled and invigorated by the statement that Agassiz is proud to enroll himself in their ranks. The good, grand, noble man, the apostle of pure science, the investigator and discoverer, the person who was preËminently a scientific force as well as a scientific intelligence dies with the feeling that his occupation was that of a ‘teacher.’ He, of course, leaves little or no property to his family; the noble woman, the bereaved wife, the constant companion of his intellect as well as of his heart, she who followed him whithersoever he was led by the spirit of scientific research, is, we suppose, the executrix of little but his glory; but the will is sublime, because it records the fact that Louis Agassiz was ‘a teacher.’ That was his occupation on earth. What it may be above, we do not pretend to know. One thing we know is this, that the simple preamble to his will must kindle into a generous flame every soul engaged in the great cause of education. ‘Louis Agassiz, teacher!’ but what a teacher! We preserve many memories of precious conversations with him on this question of teaching. He considered that teaching was a communication of life as well as of knowledge. A lad of ten years once contrived to get into the State House when Agassiz was urging the incontrovertible arguments for his ‘museum.’ We happened to jostle against the lad as he was leaving the hall, and asked him, laughingly, his opinion of the performance. ‘Well,’ he said, ‘I’ve been to many lectures, and have been tired to death, but Agassiz comes right up to my notion of the circus!’ When we told Agassiz of this queer compliment, he was much pleased. He wanted to see the boy who had been so unconsciously appreciative of the spirit of his speech. He knew that he had magnetized grave and elderly men, and that what he asked for would be cheerfully granted; but he desired to shake hands with the lad who thought he was as good as ‘a circus,’ and sent out from his deep lungs great roars of laughter in welcoming the testimony of his juvenile admirer.

“It would be idle to multiply instances of the thorough humanity and geniality of Agassiz. Everybody who knew him can tell hundreds of anecdotes illustrative of his sympathy with all forms of life, whether in the jelly-fish, the human infant, the developing boy or girl, the mature man or woman. Still his conviction of the immateriality and personality of mind was something wonderful in so austere a naturalist. We happened once to please him by defining a jelly-fish as organized water. ‘Now look at it through the microscope,’ he said. ‘But, Agassiz, the play of the organization is so wonderful that it seems to me that nothing but mind can account for it.’ ‘You are right,’ was his answer; ‘in some incomprehensible way, God Almighty has created these beings, and I cannot doubt of their immortality any more than I doubt of my own.’ His fealty to the rights of animals exceeded that of any great naturalist who ever preceded him. Incompetent as we are to give him his due rank among the great naturalists of the world, we think he excelled every naturalist who has gone before him in striking at the soul and individuality of all animals below man. It is impossible to convey in words the peculiar feeling which Agassiz had on this matter. Doubtless this large and genial genius is now satisfied. We cannot penetrate beyond the veil.

“What we can do, however, is to celebrate Agassiz as a teacher, and try to send a new glow into the heart of every person engaged in the difficult art of teaching. How hard is their work! The present generation is brought up, as far as education is concerned, on the most economical principles. No consideration whatever is given to the point of the will of Agassiz. When he proudly calls himself ‘a teacher,’ he means that he is a radiator of heat as well as of light. A poet has well described the method of instruction adopted by Agassiz:

Pipe, Tobacco and Matches in his Coffin

Mr. KlaËs, who was known among his acquaintances by the name of the “King of Smokers,” died some years ago near Rotterdam. According to the Belgian papers he had amassed a large fortune in the linen trade, and had erected near Rotterdam a mansion, one portion of which was devoted to the arrangement of a collection of pipes according to their nationality and chronological order. A few days before his death he summoned his lawyer, and made his will, in which he directed that all the smokers of the country should be invited to his funeral, that each should be presented with 10 lb. of tobacco and two Dutch pipes of the newest fashion, on which should be engraved the name, arms and date of the decease of the testator. He requested all his relatives, friends and funeral guests to be careful to keep their pipes alight during the funeral ceremonies, after which they should empty the ashes from their pipes on the coffin. The poor of the neighborhood who attended to his last wishes were to receive annually, on the anniversary of his death, 10 lb. of tobacco and a small cask of good beer. He desired that his oak coffin should be lined with the cedar of his old Havana cigar boxes, and that a box of French caporal and a packet of old Dutch tobacco should be placed at the foot of his coffin. His favorite pipe was to be placed by his side, along with a box of matches, a flint and steel, and some tinder, as he said there was no knowing what might happen. A clever calculator has made out that Mr. KlaËs had, during his eighty years of life, smoked more than four tons of tobacco, and had drunk about 500,000 quarts of beer.

Thankfulness to God

In the codicil annexed to the last will of Robert North, Esq., of Scarborough, England, proved in October, 1705, the following occurs:

“I give to Mrs. R. G. my English walnut bureau, made large to contain clothes, but hope she will not forget when she makes use of it that graces and virtues are a lady’s most ornamental dress; and that that dress has this peculiar excellence, that it will last for ever and improve by wearing.

“I give to Lieutenant W. M., my godson, my sword, and hope he will (if ever occasion should require it) convince a rash world he has learnt to obey his God as well as his general, and that he entertains too true a sense of honour to admit anything into the character of a good soldier which is inconsistent with the duty of a good Christian.

“And now having, I hope, made a proper disposition of my lands and money, those pearls of great price in the present esteem of men, let me take this opportunity of expressing my gratitude to the grand original proprietor; and here I must direct my praises to that benign Being who through all the stages of my life hath encompassed me with a profusion of favours, and who by a wonderful and gracious Providence hath converted my very misfortunes and disappointments into blessings; nor let me omit, what the business just finished seems more particularly to require of me, to return Him my unfeigned thanks, who, to all the comforts and conveniences of life, hath superadded this also of being useful even in death, by thus enabling me to dispose of a double portion, namely, out of love to the poor, and another of gratitude to my friends.

“All my faults and follies, almost infinite as they have been, I leave behind me with wishes, that as here they had their birth and origin, they may here be buried in everlasting oblivion. My infant graces and little embryo virtues are, I trust, gone before me into heaven, and will, I hope, prove successful messengers to prepare my way. Thither, O Lord, let them mount up with unremitting constancy, while my soul in the meantime feasts itself with ecstatic reflections on that ravishing change when, from the nonsense and folly of an impertinent, vain, and wicked world, it shall be summoned to meet its kindred spirits, and admitted into the blissful society of angels and men made perfect; when, instead of sickness, gloominess, and sorrow (the melancholy retinue of sin and house of clay), glory and immortal youth shall be its attendants, and its habitation the palace of the King of Kings: this will be a life worth dying for indeed! thus to exist, tho’ but in prospect, is at present joy, gladness, transport, ecstacy! Fired with the view of this transcendent happiness and triumphant in hope, these noble privileges of a Christian, how is it possible to forbear crying out O Death, why art thou so long in coming? why tarry the wheels of thy chariot?

“To that Supreme Being, whose treasures and goodness are thus infinite and inexhaustible, be all honour and glory for ever. Amen.”