Star.
London, England, 1809-09-19 00:00:00

- 7 '

THE .LATE LADI 1121111 S !FILL.

.A cause has lately been instituted in Doctors' Cam-
mous respecting' the Will of the I rte La hy Bath; tin.
der circumstances of a very singular nature. The
question is simply, Whether the Ecclesiastical Court
can rectify the errors of her convey sneer, and thereby,
carry her Testamentary intentions into effect ?
The late Countess' of Bath, being the only child of
Sir William Pulteney, Bart. died without issue. In
July 1794., in contemplation of a marriage between
her (et that time Baroness of Bath) and her cousin,
Sir James Murraye(now.• Pulteney) Baronet, articles
of agreement were entered into between themovhereby
all her real and personal estates, except as therein
mentioned, were conveyed to Trustees, upon the trusttherein nentioned, and a power was .given to Lady.
Bath t dispore thereof by Deed or Will.,
While the articles of agreement' were preparing,
Lady Bath gave 'verbal d:rections- tb Mr. Kipling, one
of the Six Clerks of the Court of Chancery, to prepare
a Will, which she intended to execute soon after her
rriarreige ; from which directions Mr. Kipling accor-
dingiv do eiv heeds of a Will which were delivered by
him to Lady Bath, for her pe-usal, a short time pre-
vious to her marriage, and that gentleman-attended
her several times for her final approbation, and after
the Will had been settled it was fairler copied ; and. as'.
Lady Bath, and her husband Sir denies, were about'
• to leave London for some months before aWill could
be prepared in form, the instructions were executed
by her in the month of August, 1794, as her Will ;
and she directed that they should have the same force
and effs2ct if a Will had been actually executed. By
these instructions Lady Bath, after bequeathing seve-
rs] specific legacies,•directe the interest of all the re-
sidue of her personal estate, (now, by the death of ber
father, who died intestate, upwards of 600,0001.) to be
raid to her father for, life, and after his death to her
husband, Sir J. Pulteney for life ; and after his death,
the principal, and all accumulation of interest, tobe di-
vided among the younger children equally, and in de-
fault of such issue to Eliz. Evelyn Markham (the wife
of the Rev.. Geo. Markham ) for life, and after her death
the principal to go to such one or more if her children
and grand-children as she should appoint, and in de-
fault of such issue, then to the surviving brothers or
sisters of Mrs. Markham, equally ; and should there
be one only, to such one ; and if all should be dead,
to the executor or administrator of the survivor. Af-
ter the instructions were executed, Lady Bath return-
ed them to Mr. Kipling, stating, that she had made
an alteration in 'the last folio, which of course must be
made in the will, and he was directed to prepare a
will agreeably to such instructions ; but Mr. Kipling
being at the time whenthe will was directed tube pre-
pared much engaged in other business, he applied to the
late Mr. Holiday, a conveyancer of eminence, torecom-
mend a proper person to drew a will according to her
instructions. Mr. Holiday recommended adraftsman,
and Mr. Kipling gave him the instructions executed by
Lady Bath.' He drew the will, and returned it to Mr.
Kipling, who, hiviiig perused it, directed two copies
to be made and delivered to her Ladyship for execu-
tion. Lady Bath having made an alteration in the de-
vise of the residuary estates in favour of Mrs. Ma: k-
ham and her issue, as tveli as in the event of her (Lady
Bath) leaving only one daughter, and no ether child,
as in that expressed in the instructions cf leaving one
only son, and also by giving the residuary personal
estate, in default of Mrs. Markham's leaving issue,
to an only child of her (Lady Bath) before the be-
quest thereof to her (Lady Bath's) brothers or sisters.
Such alteration was made by Mr. Kipling, and in
cnnseqireiice, it was founa necessary to take away
some of the sl:eets of the fair copies, and to substi-
tute others containing smith alterations, and in Novem-
ber 1791 two parts of the will were executed by Lady
Bath, one of which was kept by herself, and the other
was directed by her to he kept by Mr. Kipling.—
.Neither Mr. Kipling nor the draftsman ever received
any subsequent instructions from Lady Bath, and her
Ladyship and Mr. Kipling believed the two parts of
the will to be in-strict conformity with the instructions
'she had executed. No variation or omission in the
will was discovered during her life-time; but since
her death, upon comparing the will with the instruc-
tions, it has been found that the clause disposing of
the personal estate differs from, and is riot co-exten-
sive with the disposition contained in the instruc-
tions, which difference arose through the inadvertency
of the draftsman employed by Mr. Kipling.
On the death of Lady Bath, the probate of her will
was granted to Sir Thomas Jones Bart. and Christo-
pher Codringtor., two of the Executors, power being
rererved to Mr. Kipling, the other Executor. Sir
• James Pui eiev, in consequence of the Conveyancer
having oniitts'd to continue the remainder over to
Mts. Markham, on the contingency of Lady Bath not
having any issue, claims an absolute interest in the resi-
duary estate ; a decree has therefore lately been taken
out by Mrs. Evelyn Fawcett, wife of John Fawcett,
Esq. fermerly Markham, the residuary legatee, substi-
tuted in the v.ill on the death of Sir James Pulteney, as
we before observed, citing the Executors to bring into
Court the Probate, and shew cause why it, should not
be revoked, and declared void, on account of the
clause in the Will disposing of the residuary personal
estate, Lot conteinieg equally' extensive provisions as
are expressed in the heads or instructions ; and on
time probate being declared void, to accept a new pro-
lsee with that part or clause of the instructions which
respects the disposal of the residue of the personal
estate, as constituting together the true Will of Lady
Path ; and Mr. Kipling is also cited to bring into
Coen the instractions and original draft made by the
deeti • men. Sir James Pulteney is cited also to ap.
pear to proceedings.

Thirty-two Capital Pr'ze -ill I e Drawn in ONE
DAY, the 20E1 of re:A moilth?• It..hc e with the smaller
Prize., makes in the whroc:temtdhse imuene si.m of Two
Hundred Thi,usand will be distributed in
the short space of twelve hours the fortunate
adventurers in the prc'ent state Lammong 1, as
drawing will be corneted a vile
d--tCyl
The th
Se clem Whole
Scheme
p;
is highly approved, and tlle demand for Tickets and
Shares has bees greater than in :u ,y Lottery for many
years past.
Friday evening, as .1. Paice, coachman to Lovelace
l
lligg Wither, Esq. of Manydov:n, near
Basingstoke,
was leading his master's carriage out or the Swan
yard, at Kingsclere, the horses took fright,
when he
was thrown down and so severely bruised
9 that he
languished only two days and then e;:pired.

. • 'l.

... .

.


• . •
tdPtitj tkfiend. • •
• • -
Ye4ter,fay,tardA Lahghsei vragitiZeittlfo!MtM'
A diOrdin-ly house, in the iiegbhotirlood of Bighopo'
pie-str,et: •
"he defence set up was, that she was sot niistrest
of the house, but merely a servant ; it appearitig.hovi.
ever; that she kePt the keys, and otherwise deciaied
as mistress, ftieitity foutia• her Guilty.
'The ItEcomita, in pronouncing judgffient, drier-
4ed, that though it was not in his power to Make the
defendant disgorge any of her ill-gotten wealth, yet
the eccurt would inflict such a punishment upon her,
•as he hoped would make a lasting impression On her
memory, and prevent her following so disgraceful
and iniquitous a course of life in future.
She was sentenced to three mouths imprisonment.
in Giltspur-street.Compter.
. .