The Express.
London, England, 1868-04-17 00:00:00

THIRD EDITION.

INTELLIGENCE.-(THIS DAY.)

EQUITY COURT.
(Before Vitoi.Choosollor Gifford.)
CREsswELL T. CRIMSWELL.

general questions were discussed in this snit arising out
of th, will of Miss Frances Oresswel, of 91,
princesga.r% and meter of the late eminent Judge
of the 1 te and Divorce Court. Mks Cromwell
&Klan the 13th of December, 1865, having by will given
a lar;e number of leganies—iunorg the rest, to her brother
• CreaareU 3,0001. She also gave 1,0001. 3 per
cat. conp,ls to be vested in trustees (which trustees she
eppoicted to he ber executors, and the incumbent of the
Clinch of the Holy Trinity, Brompton), to be expended
in bidding • parsonage in emulation with that church.
gy 3 testamentary paper writing she gave 2001. to Brompton
Choral, " to be disposed of as Dr. Irons wishes ;" and in
the sumo paper, after a number of legacies, she inserted the
following clause, " Dr. Irons, 200/. My brother William
sod my brother Oswald each 3,0001." The papw writing,
with two others, wereduly executed as acodiril to the will,
in the presence of two witnesses, one of whom was the wife
to Dr. Irons. The questions were, first, whether the legacy
to Brompton Church was void, by reason of the attestation
of Mrs. Irons ; whether the legacy towards the building
of a parsonage was void under the statute of mortmain ;
and whether the legacy in the codicil to Mr. William
Criswell was cumulative, or merely in substitution for
the former legacy of like amount.
Mr. Willcock, Q.C., Mr. Pearson, Q.C., Mr. Kerslake,
Q.C., Mr. Drum, Q.C., Mr. Jolife, Mr. Freeing, Mr. A.
Dixon, and Mr. B. B. Rogers appeared for the various par-
ties. The case was argued during the last sittings.
The Vice-Chancellor gave judgment this morning. His
Honour thought that the legacy given to the church " to
be disposed of as Dr. Irons wishes," was not • legacy in-
tended to be struck at by the 15th section of the
Will Act, which renders void any legacy to an at-
testing witness, or to the husband or wife of an
attesting witness. Such • provision could only
apply where a pinsect benefit was intended to the legatee.
The legacy to Dr. Irons himself was of course annulled by
his wife's attestation. Brompton Church was built under
the Church Building Acts, and the money might be dis-
posed of, as Dr. Irons might wish, in the repair, improve-
moat. enlargement, or ornamentation of the church. As
to the building of the parsonage, the bequest pointed
to a parsonage in connexion with the church,
and the result of an inquiry which had been directed on
this point showed that the old burial ground of the church
had been closed, but that • portion of it had been re-
served fur the building of • parsonage, if that should be
raceway. It also appeared that those facts were known
to the testatrix, and there having been at her death
land appropriated for the purpose of building a parsonage,
which could be Liwfully so used, kis Honour thought
that this bequest was good. As to the third point, consi-
dering that the second gift of 3,0001. to the testatrix's
brothers was made by a codicil, and did not occur in the
will itself, his Honour thought that the second gift was
not intended to be in substitution for the first, and oonse.
rit.ently that Mr. William Creswell was entitled to both
leg ides.