The Sun.
London, England, 1823-11-20 00:00:00

Pkict SZVENPENCEt

very aged Clergyman, the gm ,F' n, the Isle to Wight;
Who died in the year 1822, 'et thd -Very "advanced .agitofll2, and
the parties,'Mr. Ilodgeon and Mr. Clernitson, both stood in the
relation of nephews to the deceased.
:In 1818 ,M r.„Dalton: had ~made a will appointing both !the:se
nephews his exeOtors. He afterwards conceietal some dis-
, approhation,of Mr: Clernitson, and in 1818: intide Ouse will,
excluding him front the ,executorship; ,but theme suepieions
SubseqUently vanished, And in Augiiit,, 1821; lie 'not& & will
aguin in favour of both nephews ; the codicil in question. whierit
was dated on the back of It March 21, 1822; was- wholly in ta.:
von r of Hodgson t and the deceased. died in the followthg nuneth
of May.
The whole. pnaperti.6f Of' deceased`, amounted to,tietwetn
8,0001. and 0,000/., and out of this the. will of 1821 gave le-
gaciee of 1004-each to all his great' nephews
.antliiiieeti; who
were stated to be 411 in number.
At the dine.or executing this'd ill, it is eleai det64d had
great confidenceln Clernitson : on the Ist of Beptember.(a few
days after the will) he wrote to Clemition; saYing—L'i llotigsen
has settled ,nay Milt, but:it may:be, altered"-- .. rell mail yOu
approve of
,it," &c. Front this time nothing seems to have oi: ettrred to alter the views of the deceeted, no quarrel with Cle;
mitson, no new cause of affection Ibr Hodgson ; and yet a Cotti%
cil is supposed to be made on the 2let of March folloiing; Cit.
titely altering the disposition of the ptoperty,ontlerixing.etthei—'
the whole residue, or (according to another construction) the
whole property of the deceased to his nephew Hollgte-ine • :
The Learned Judge laid it down that where there is a fertiiil
will, regularly executed and attested in presence of witnesses,
the presumption in Its favour is strong, and a burthen lies to
the party setting up another paper to eilta.blish it on proof ex-
tremely clear andstrong. In the present case it is begging e
question to say that the capacity of the deceased, his hand
ing, his capability,are till proved, and that to impugn it friend
must be proved on the other side. The fact to be proved is, that
this paper was written subsequently to the will of 1821; and thin
is a question of fact to be decided on the conflict of opposing. pro-
liabilities. Here the Learned Judge went into 11 minute, de-
borate, and most ingenious examination of the facts, to chew that
fur from being proved to have been wriueu after the will ,of
1821, so as to revoke great part of' its provision:ten wail clearly
written before that period, and probably before 1816. We have
not now space to follow the Learned Judge through ail the
minutite of these arguments t but in accounting for the date
Indorsed on the back of the codicil, he balanced the probabi-
htiea so as to show that it was at least equally probable that' it
might have been done by the management of Hodgson without
the dear testamentary knowledge of the deceased as hp the dt!.
ceased; and he concluded*" Upon the whole, though I by no
means pronounce that a fraud has been committed, I pro-
nounce that Mr. Hodgson has failed in proof.".
CURLING V. ,TIIORNTON.
This was a very important and curious question, which-arose
on the will of the late celebrated *porting Col. 'Thornton :, anti it came before the Court on the admission of an allegation on
the part of his widow, Pleading that by his will she was wholly
passed over, and her son had only 1004 as a legacy.
The fetes were, that in 1810 Colonel Thornton, abandoning
his lawful wife and legitimate son in England, went over t,,
France where on, the 30th January 1817 he obtained letters a
naturalisation, bought an estate, assumed the title. (attached to
that estate) of Marquis de Pody, and fixed his residence int, •
vocably in France, where lie died in Mey 1823. In 1818, how. • ever, lie came over to England on besiness, and stayed a few
weeks, during which time he made 4 formal will in the English
language and forms, giving his property, real and personal, to
a Lady who lived with him, and to her child or cluldrenoi.--
This will had been pleaded in the form called a Common .Con..
ditlit: the allegation on the other aide pleaded In substance,
that such a will was null by the law of France, and that col.
Thornton being a naturalized Frenchman, his will was to be
determined by that law.
Drs. BARNA"' 1r end Pita el ato an were heard at petit
length in objection to the adtniesibility of the allegation, they
contending that the right of making a will belongs generally to
all men by the general law of nations, anti it' modified by the
laws of a partienlar country, those laws could only operate as
far as their jurisdiction extended.
Dr. Ltratellearow, on the other side, argued, that ,hy the
I generally admitted rule of English law, all disposition of pet-
sone] property, whether by will or intestacy, must be deter-
mined by the law of the country where the deceased had per-
manently taken up his domicil, and that a merely casual visit
to his native country and making a will there does not alter
the case.
1.71ie argument was not concluded, and this curious and inte-
resting point therefore stands over for further discussion on the
next Court day.