The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1875-11-27 00:00:00

LORD ST. LEONARDS' WILL.

The cause of "Sugden and Others v. St. Leonards
and Others intervening" has been before the Probate,
Divorce, and Admiralty Division of the Supreme Court
of Judicature. The inquiry in this case relates to the
valislity of the alleged last will, with eight codicils, of
the late Lord. St. Leo/Ian:14; who died'at his residence,..
Boyle Farm, in the county of Surrey, on' the 29th of
January last, at the very advanced age of 94. The
papers have been propounded by the plaintiffs, the
Hon. and Rev. Frank Sugden and the Hon. Charlotte
Sugden, a son and. daughter of the deceased, as ex-
ecutors ; -and their validity is contested by the de-
fendants, the present Lord St. Leonards and other
members of the family, some of whom take part in the
suit as interveners, on the ground, substantially, that
the contents of the alleged will (which is not forth-
coming) were not set out in the plaintiff's declaration;
that it was destroyed by the deceased with the in-
tention of revoking it, and that the codicils, being de-
pendent on it, also fell with it. Mr. Hawkins, Q.C.,
Mr. Inderwick, Q.C., and Dr. Tristram appeared for
the plaintiffs); Dr. Denne, Q.C., the Hon. A. Thesiger,
Q.C., and Mr. l3ayford for Lord St. Leonardo and his
younger brothers and sisters (the principal defendants),
and for Mrs. Mann, a daughter of the testator, inter-
vening ; and Dr. Spinka, Q.C., for Mrs. JeMmett,
also a daughter of the derlased, and her children; Sir
H. James, • Q.C., and nr. G. Browne for Mr. and
'qrs. Henderson; and 'gr. Searle for Mr. Arthur
Sugden, a grandson of tte deceased, who are the
other defendants, and wilt) take part in the suit as
interveners.—We take the following report of the case
from The Times :

The history of the case, which derived its principal in-
terest from' the fact that the alleged will, which was exe-
cuted in January, 1870, was not found among the papers of
the deceased after his death, and that no tidings of it have
since been discovered though large rewards have been
offered for its production, was as follows :—During his dis-
tinguished and prosperous career, dhich culminated in his
appointment to the office of Lord High Chancellor of Eng-
land, Lord St. Leonard's (tie deceased) purchased from time
to time considerable amounts of real property, and at the
date of his death he was possessed of the Chtlderley Hall
Estate, in Cambridge (1,072 acres), producing an annual
rental of £1,50; Sutton Scotney, in Hampshire (1 200
acres), producing a rental of £1,000; Peasewood, in Berk-
shire (800 aeres), producing a rental of £1,260 a year; Filgate
Forest Lodge, in Sussex. yielding a rental of £283 a year;
Boyle Farm, which contained little more than 50 acres, but
which he had improved and furnished at great cost, with
the intention of making it the family resicence ; a farm
known as Lord St. Leonards' Farm, and three meadows
at Thames Ditton, producing together a rental of £405
a year; and, lastly, the Kingsdown Estate in Kent (Lam
acres), the rental of which was estimated at £1,200 a year.
In addition to the foregoing real estate, the deceased, who,
it was stated, had given suitable fortunes to each of his six
daughters who had married in his lifetime, also left person-
alty to the amount of £60,000. Lady St. Leonards died in
le6l. The Hon Henry Sugden, who, if he had survived his
father, would have succeeded to the Peerage, was born in
1811, married in 1849, mid died in December, 1866, leaving a
widow, and, among other issue, his eldest son Edward Burten-
shaw Sugden, now Lord St. Leopards. The second son of
the deceased, the Hon. and Rev. Frank Sugden, who is in
Holy Orders, and Vicar of Hale Magni, in Lincolushire, was
born in 1817, and survived hislather ; but Arthur, the third
son, died in 1868, leaving a son, Who bore his name. Of his
seven daughters, Miss Charlotte Sugden, the plaintiff, alone
remained unmarried. As to the others, one. (Norah) mar-
ried Mr. .Temmett, the Bankruptcy Commissioner; a second
(Juliet) married, first, a Mr. Dixon, and, on his decease, a Mr.
Lowe ; a third (Sophia) married ;Colonel Cleveland • a fourth
(Harriet) married the Rev. Mr. Mann ' • a fifth (Caroline) mar-
ried Colonel Turner: and the sixth (Augusta) married Mr.
John Reilly, whom the testator named one of his executors
and trustees, but who has died since the institution of the
present suit. The purchase of the Kingsdown estate was
completed in December, 1869, and, on the 13th of January,
1870, the testator made the will which is now in dispute. It
was prepared and executed by the deceased in the presence of
his daughter, Miss Charlotte Sugden; it was read over to her
by her father, and its contents, as remembered by here are set
out in the declaration. It was impossible to suppose, Mr.
Hawkins said, in opening the case, that one possessed of the
legal knowledge of Lord St Leonards, who had himself, by his
writings, inculcated upon otters the propriety of making their
wills, would have himself delayed the disposition of his pro-
perty by valid testamentary instruments, but, as a fact, the
earliest paper of such a character under his hand was prepared
after his son Henry's death, and was executed in 1867 and 1868.
By it he appointed his son, the Hon. and Rev. Frank
Sugden, his daughter, the Hon. Charlotte Sugden, and his
son-in-law, Mr. John Reilly, his trustees, and he devised to
them his estates of Childerly Hall, Sutton Scotney, Pease-
mere, Filgate, Forest Lodge, Boyle Fame, the aits in the
River Thames, together with his land and cottages at Thames
Ditton, in trust for the use of-his grandson, Edward Burten-
shave Sugden, now Lord St. Leonards, for life, and after his
death, for his first and other sons successively in tail male;
with remainder, with like limitations, to his grandsons,
Henry Frank Sugden and Walter, and with ultimate re-
mainder to his son Frank Sugden and his issue. He directed
that the pictures and other objects of art, (Fee., at Boyle
Farm should be held as heirlooms, and enjoyed with the real
estates which he had devised "; and he gave to his daughter,
Miss Charlotte Sugdeu, a legacy of £6,000, directing that, in
addition to other smaller bequests, she should have, out of
his farming stock, "two cows, to be selected by herself;
two dezen plants out of his conservatory, also to be
selected by herself ; and two dozen bottles of his old
sherry," with which to begin housekeeping. • And he
finally directed his executors to pay to his daughter £6O
per annum during the life of "an aged person to be named
by her to be applied for the benefit of that person." It was
stated that the aged person referred to was the widow of a
deceased brother of the testator, and that she herself was
far advanced in years. On the 13th of January, 1870, the
testator continued the dispositions in this instrument by a
peper, which commenced, "Ibis is an addition to my will,"
and he then proceeded to dispose of the Kingsdown estate in
favour of his son Frank, to whom he gave the life interest,
and subject thereto to his first and other sons successively
in tail-male; directing, however, that in the event of his
personal estate being insufficient to pay in full the legacies
bequeathed by him, Mr. Frank Sugden should only receive
£3OO a year out of the estate, the rest of the income being
applied to the making up of the deficiency. He also gave
legacies of £l5O each to three grandchildren, daughters of
Mrs. Jemmett, in addition to an annuity of £6O each;
and, after other small bequests to other members
of his family, he named his daughters Charlotte Sugden,
Caroline Turner, and Augusta Reilly his residuary
legatees. The will was written on nineteen sheets oi
letter-paper, and after the deceased had prepared it, it was
executed by him in the presence of certain ot his servants,
who were called in at his request to attest it. On the 3rd of
March, 1870, he added a codicil to the will; on the 4th of
July, 1871, a second codicil; a third codicil on the 16th of
September, 1871; a fourth on the 20th of September, 1871;
and a fifth on the 24th of November, 1871, the most important
change in his testamentary dispositions made by these papers
being a gift to Miss Charlotte Sugden of three meadows at
Thames Ditton, on which she built a residence in 1873, with
the sanction and assistance of her father. A sixth codicil,
however, which was executed on the 25th of March, 1572,
altered' most materially the disposition of his property, as it
affected his heir and successor in the title, and the change in
his intentions was, it was alleged, brought about in this
manner. In 1870 the heir and grandson of the testator, Mr.
Edward Burtenshaw Sugden, went to Rome and there made
the acquaintance of a younglady to whom he shortly after-
wards became engaged. The testator highly disapproved of the
engagement, and to mark his displeasure of his grandson's
conduct prepared a codicil on the 18th of April, 1870, by
which he cut down his bounty to his grandson to an annuity
of £BOO a year in the event of Mr. Burtenshaw Sugden's mar-
riage with the lady In question. A. copy of this codicil,
which was subsequently destroyed, wag forwarded by the tes-
tator to Mrs. Henry Sugden, the mother of the defend int ;
but when it became known to the young lady's friends that
Lord St. Leonards disapproved the marriage they at once
broke off the engagement, and grandfather and graudson be-
came again reconciled. A second matrimonial engagement
into which the defendant entered in 1872 gave still more eerious
umbrage to his grandfather, and it was suggested that it was
in this displeasure the sixth codicil had its origin. The paper I
was dated the 25th of March, 1872, and it ran, "I give to my
son Frank, in addition to the other devises to him, rriy Sutton
Scotney Farm and the inanonand village property for his life,
and I revoke so much of any previous devise made by use as
would interfere with that gift, but no further, and after
his death I declare that it I shall return to the several uses
declared of it by previous deveises by me; and I charge the
said Sutton Scotney Estate with the payment of £lOO a year
to my daughter Harriet Mann during her life for her inalien-
able separate use. And I hereby revoke nay previous devises
of my Filgate Estate in the county of Sussex, and I devise it
to my daughter-in-law, Marianne Sugden, widow of my late
son, the Hon. Henry Sudgen, for her life, and, after her
decease, to her second son, Henry Frank, his heirs, and
assigns. By a seventh codicil, dated May 2, 3872, he
further advanced his son, the Rev. Frank Sugden, and,
In proportion, cut down the bequests and devices
contained its the will in favour of his heir, by giving him
Boyle Farm House, with its contents and grounds,
for life; and by the eighth and last codicil, which was
executed on the 20th of August, 183. he tonfirmed the.
dispositions which he had made in favour of his daughter,
Miss Charlotte Sugden. All the papers were then put into
the will-box of the testator. The will, as well as the
codicils, were, at the time, seen by Miss Charlotte Sugden;
but when the box was opened after the testator's death, the
will could not be found with the codicils, which were in the
condition in which they were left by the deceased. It was
stated that, beyond occasional irritability and momentary
fancies, the deceased showed no mental decay in the last
years of his life, and that his intellect was unclouded up to
the time of his death.
On the close of Mr. Hawkine' epening statement, which
occupied upwards of two and a half hours, Miss Charlotte
Suedes' was caned, and her examination in chief was not
concluded when the Court adjourned until next day.

On Thursday, Miss Charlotte Sngden again entered the
witness-box and her examination in chief was resumed In
sabstance it was as follows :—She stated that she had always
lived with her father, and for several years had acted as his
amanuensis and otherwise assisted him when engaged in the
revision of his an merous legal works She added that she
had read all that her father had ever published, and that when.
preparing his "Handy Books" it was his habit to read them
to her, observing that if she could follow their reasoning the
general public, for whose use they were intended, could also
understand them She described the circumstances attending
the preparation of his will on the 13th of January, 1870. On the
morning of that day she observed that her father was busy with
his papers, and that when writing he had his will of 1867 be-
fore him.. Called by her to luncheon, he declined to suspend
his labours, and when he had finished writing he expressed
pleasure at having completed his will. He then read it
slowly to her, and executed it in the presence of two of his
servants, who were summoned for the purpose. She declared
that her father had mide no secret of his intention to give
the Kingadown estate to his second son, and that when he
became alienated from his grandson he avowed his determi-
nation to make Mr. Frank Sugden the head of the family.
The testator, she said, was much averse from his grandson's
marrying, not only because of his youth, but also beoause of
the trouble which the necessary settlements would involve,
and he was also much incensed at the part which his grand-
son took in the agitation in 1870 for the removal of the Dean
of Wells The thud inpture between them occurred in
1872, when Mr. Burtenshaw Sudgen's visits to the Boyle
Farm ceased. With regard to the series of dis,Araceful
" hoaxes " which were practised on Lord St. Leonards
in the latter years of his life, and which he male
public through the columns of The Times, they gave, the
witness said, the utmost pain and annoy mice to him, one in
particular, an order for a monument with a false inscription
to the memory of Lady St. Leonard's, renewing all his afflic-
tion for his wife's loss. The so-called hoaxes or practical
jokes commenced in 1863 and terminated in 1870. The corn-
mnnications generally came through the Paddington station
of the Great Western Railway, but though every means, in-
cluding the employment of detectives, were used to find out
the author, no clue to his identity could be discovered.
In continuation, Miss Sugden deposed that she was pre-