The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-11-13 00:00:00

be u,
blacks
Ea&

SATIIRDA,Y, NOV. 13, 1875

ever, his death was so imminent that Dr. Andrews,
seeing that no time was to be lost if the will were to be I
at all executed, advised the testator to avail himself of ,
the services of Mr. Le Riche, a solicitor residing at
Hampstead. Mr. Le Riche was accordingly senor,
and immediately proceeded to draught the will inc- !
cordance with the " terms " or instructions in the tes-
tator's handwriting. By the will so prepared the de- I
ceased gave the whole of his property, with the excep-
tion of a sum of £l,OOO which was to be. applied in
providing a gold medal to be annually competed for I
by sculptors and students in the Slade School of Art,
to trustees to pay the income of one moiety thereof to
his wife for life, and of the other moiety to his
sisters Jane and Louisa for life, the survivor of the
three to have the enjoyment of the whole
income for life, and 'on her death the capital
sum to be handed over to the Artists' Beno-
lent Fund Society. The original models of his works
he bequeathed to the Royal Dublin Society, and he di.
rected that Mr. Brock and Mr. Dewick, two of his as-
sistants in his studio, should finish his works then in
progress according to the models. In preparing the
document Mr. Le Riche read each clause to the testa.
, tor mit was written out, asking him whether or not it
properly expressed his wishes. Mr. Le 'Riche again
read it to him in its completed state, and then, by direc-
tion of the testator, the name of Mr. Charles Bell
Birch, who had been at one time an assistant of his,
was also named one of the gentlemen who were to com-
plete his works, and the bequest to the Slade School
of Art was struck out, the testator observing that the
institution had already sufficient funds for its purposes.
He then proceeded to sign the paper, but found a
difficulty in doing so' being unable properly to grasp
the pen. He at first declined assistance, but at last
consented to allow the nurse to steady his hand and
Mr. Le Riche to aid him in guiding his pen. Having
with their help completed his signature, he was
understood to say, "There, I have done it." This was
his last utterance, and he died about ten minutes
after be had signed the will, which was subscribed by
Mr. Le Riche and Elizabeth Backford, the nurse, as
attesting witnesses. It appeared also, that after Mr.
Le Riche had written the attestation clause to the
document Miss Jane Foley, who was in the room, re-
membered that in conversing with her brother in the
morning he had expressed his intention to leave £BOO
to Mr. Brock in consideration of services to be dis-
charged by that gentleman, and to give a legacy of
£lOO to each of his two nieces; and she called atten-
tion to the fact that those bequests were omitted from
the will. Mr. Le Riche suggested that the prudent
course would be to execute the will as prepared, and
then to add a codicil carrying out the intentions of the
deceased in respect of the bequests in question. In
that suggestion Mr. Le Riche understood the testator
to concur, but no attempt was made to carry it out
owing to the rapid sinking of the deceased imme-
diately after he had signed the will.
In support of the will Mr. be Riche, Mrs. Foley,
Miss Jane Foley, the nurse and several other wit-
nesses who were present at execution of the in-
strument were called, and all deposed that while
physically most feeble the deceased was perfectly con-
scious up to the moment of his death. On cross-exa-
mination they were preseed to say whether he had not
become quite unconscious immediately after he had
signed the paper, and before the witnesses subscribed
to it, but they expressed a positive belief that he
had not, Mrs. Foley deposing as a reason for her
belief that a few minutes before his death her
husband opened his eyes and looked at her with appa-
rent consciousness of her presence. On the part ot the
defendants Mr. Brock was called, and he stated, ad-
mitting, however, that he was not in as good a position
to see what was passing in the room as the other wit-
Renee were that the testator appeared to be uncon-
scious from the time he signed the will until his death.
On cross.examination, however, the witness added that
he could not speak with certainty on the point, as
during the period in question he had only a profile
view of Mr. Foley's countenance.
Dr. Spinke, Mr. Gates, and Dr. Deane then ad-
dressed the Court on behalf of their respective clients,
and on the close of their arguments,
His Lordship delivered judgment. There could be
no doubt, he said, of the competency of the testator
to understand what was being done, and to affix his
signature to the will up to the moment of his making
the first mark which appeared at the foot of the will.
It might be very doubtful whether the mark did not
contain the rudiments of his name in its entirety; as
it appeared to the Court the mark might be read as
, "J. H. F.," and if the testator intended it to be his
signature, it would be sufficient. If the case rested
I there, he should be prepared to hold that there had
I been a sufficient execution by the testator, but it did
not rest there, for Mr. Le Riche who appeared to
j have acted with great care, deposed that, seeing that
, the signature, or supposed signature, was very imper-
feet, he expressed a desire that the testator should affix
his name in full to the instrument, offering to assist
him in doing so and that, ultimately, the testator did
accept the proffered assistance in writing his name. A
question was raised in argument as to what was the
effect of that signature, supposing the testator had not
assented to Mr. Le Riche assisting him in making it;
but, as he had observed in the course of the argument
I it was wholly unimportant whether the testator au-
thorised or not the assistance given to him in making
his signature if his mind entered into the performance
, of the act done. If it were the intention of the testa-
tor to sign the paper, it mattered not whether some
one officiously, without authority, and even against his
will, assisted him to do so if his mind entered into the
performance of the act. There was no evidence to show
that the testator did not, in fact, give his assent to his
signature being made with the assistance of Mr. Le
Riche; but, on the e.iitrory, there was evidence that he
I did give his assent to it. Under these circumstances,
I the Court WAS satisfied that there had been a due
execution of the will by the testator. It was also
argued that the omission of the contemplated legacies
, of £lOO to each of his two nieces, and a legacy of £BOO
to Mr. Brock in remuneration for his services in con-
nexion with the completion of the unfinished works of
the deceased rendered the instrument not the will of a
testator. The proposition when put into shape, ,
amounted to this, that an instrument could
not be regarded as the will of a testator
if any legacy were left out which he intended
to be inserted in it, and which, at the time of the I
execution of the instrument, he believed to be included
in it. The Court could not assent to that proposition, ,
and the very contrary had been decided in "Mitchell
v. Gard" (3" Swabey and Tristram," p. 75), in which
it was held that the omission of legacies for which in-
structions, had been given from a will did not, in the
absence of fraud in the execution of the instrument,
vitiate it. But in fact, on this point also, the evidence of
-Mr. Le Riche displaced altogether the ground on
which the defendant's contention rested; for Mr. Le
Riche stated that the will was completed so far as the
writing out or the preparation of the instrument was
concerned before the matters in question were men-
tioned to him, and he gave reasons why he thought it
prudent not to delay the execution of the will as it
stood, and to leave the additional legacies to be dealt
with in a codicil. The last question for consideration
was whether the execution of the will was attested in
the presence of the testator. It was contended, and
might be contended, that; he attestation required by
the law was attestation in the mental and not the
mere bodily presence of the testator. But it was
not necessary that a testator should be proved to
have actually seen the witnesses attest the execu-
tion of the will. It was sufficient if he were
in such a position and condition that he could
have seen them if he had chosen to look. That
had been decided in several cases which would be
found set out in the late Mr. Justice William's work
on executors. But in this case there was no evidence
that the testator did not actually see the witnesses put
their names to the paper in attestation of his exeeut-
tion of it. The Court, however, were asked to infer,
from the testator's weakness and the circumstances
that some of the witnesses stated that they saw no
active signs of consciousness in the testator after he
put his name to the will, that he did not, and could
not, see the witnesses attest it; but that would be
an exceedingly unsefe ground to proceed upon where
the Court had no doubt of the will being the true
expression of the intentions of the testator, and
where it was proved, as in this case, that he did
actually execute the will. Many circumstances
might tend to distract the attention of persons sur-
rounding the death-bed of a testator and prevent them(
from taking notice whether or not he was at the time
thinking of the office which was being discharged by
the attesting witnesses. He dared say, also, that in a
vast number of cases the dying man concluded after he
himself had signed the will that his part in the drama
was played out, and that he might seem to be inat-
tentive to that which was going on about him. It
would, therefore, as be had already said, be very unsafe
if beware to act merely upon the inference to be drawn
from the witnesses saying that they did not see any-
thing which actively manifested that the testator was
in fact conscious of what was being done. But the case
was not left for the Court to draw that inference, be-
cause there was evidence of the consciousness of the
testator during the attestation of the will. Miss Jane
Foley, who gave her evidence in a manner which com-
mended it to his belief, deposed that her brother was
looking at the witnesses while they signed the will at
the side of his bed, and, further, that after the business
of the will-making was completed, she took her
brother's hand and felt a slight pressure of his in re-
turn in recognition of her; and, further, Mrs. Foley
declared that she was sure her husband was conscious
at the time, became he opened his eyes a few minutes
before his death and looked at her—his last act of re-
cognition of her. Under these circumstances, the
Court saw no reason to doubt that the testator was
capable of seeing and that he did see the witnesses
attest the will, and the Court therefore should pro-
nounce in favour of it. The Court accordingly pro-
nounced for the will, and allowed coats out of the
estate to the defendants represented by Dr. Spinks,
Q. C., and Mr. Searle; but declined to allow them to
the other defendants who had taken part in the snit
as interveners.

THE KING AND QUEEN OF' DENMARK

AND THE PRINCESS OF WALES.

The Correspondent of the Standard, writing from San-
dringham, says :
The King and Queen of Denmark, and their
youngest daughter, are now paying their second visit
to the Norfolk home of their eldest daughter, the
Princess of Wales, and the first visit since their
accession. In the year 1863, after the marriage
of the Prince and Princess of Wales, the Prince
and Princess Christian and the Princess Dagmar
visited England, and spent a short time at Sandring-
ham. Very shortly after that Prince Christian suc-
ceeded to the throne of Denmark and has not since
been to Sandringham. lier Majesty has paid a visit
here since that period, some years since, and the
Princess Dagmar has since been married to the Czars.
witch of Russia. The Princess of Wales's Royai
parents were unable on their arrival on Friday (the
sth), to see much of the wonderful transformation that
has taken place in the Royal estate glace their former
visit, aii-the whole landscape was nearly shrouded in
darkness on the arrival of the special Royal train at
Wolfqrton. At this station were assembled a number
of the tenantry and clergy on the Royal estate, by
whom their Majesties and their Royal Highnesses
received with every, mark of respect on their
from the Royal saloon to the elegant •
the ROY,aI station, and thence to the _
carriages in waiting to convey the Royal party to
Sandringham House.
The weather on Saturday washy no means the most

Teat
favourable for outdoor exercise, owing tq
quantity of rain which fell, and the Royal Peril
mained in doors during the greater part of the dal. a
The King and Queen of Denmark, the Prieclos
Wales, the Princess Thyra, and Princes Albert VA lc,
and George, attended by the Countess of ReverD °
Captain Efedeman, Monsieur de Castenschjold, Lieu
Wallet°
Colonel Teesdale, Miss Knollys, General Sir • .4„. at
Knollys, and Mr. Holzman attended Divine
the church of St. Mary Magdalene in the Park.
00101
service was conducted by the Rev. W. Lake •es
assisted by the Rev. J. N. Dalton, tutor to Prul,,ed
Albert Victor and George. The sermon was Preacm
by the Rev. W. Lake Onslow.