The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1849-07-06
pH1Apslpu,, Julv a. lsAe

The supreme court of III is State has affirmed the
decision of Judge Jones, rendered in the court of
common pleas of Northampton county, setting
aside the will Of the late Peter Miller, of Easton
and awarding the entire estate the nearest heir
at-law. The is an important one, on account
OF the principle and the amount involved. Mr..
Miller an old bachelor without any very near
relatives, and with estate valued at $3.50, OOO
Not distinguished for any great degree of iberaty
during his lifetime, and consequently not treated
with great respect, he concluded, in imitation of
Girard and others, to leave legacy to posterity,
who, ne thought, might be better able to appreciate
his character than the present generation. With this
object IN view, he made will and, by the WILL
his whole estate, with the exception Of few small
legacIes, is given to the corporations of the German
Reformed and Lutheran congregations of Easton
IN trust. After stating that he has been for long
time impressed with the importance Of providing
farmers Of industrious habits with farms, and fur.
nshns mechanics with facilities for carrying on their
business, he directs that none OF his real estate shall
ever be sold or aenaed and that his personal estate
shall be invested and secured by bond and mortgage:
so that the income arising therefrom, together with
the rents issuing from the real estate may form suit
able ond for the purpose of looming sums of money
to the aforesaid farmers and mechanics but. if Il
should so happen, in the lapse of time that the in
come Of the estate should accumulate beyond The
application for such loans (that is, should the time
vi
and " 1t is likely to remain so,' then the amount
unemployed rs TO be appropriated to the construc-
ton of an "asylum for the accommodation Of the
poor respectable infrm widows and single women {"
The will is very long, but the most material pro-
visions are, think, contained in the above synop-
Sis. The counsel for the her-at-law contended that
the purposes for which the testator attempts to dis
pose OF his estate are uncertain and indefinite and
cannot be understood that, if ineligible, the pur-
pose or intent is to create perpetuity, to prevent
forever the alienation of the real estate that il is an
attempt at an endless accumulation Of the personal
estate by oaning out the same, then oanng out the
proceeds, and then the proceeds Of that, until no
one wants to borrow, as well as a similar accumu-
lauon from the rents of the real estate, as fund.-
not for any charitable use, but as loan Office, for
the purpose Of endless accumulation that the
alleged ultimate charity is too remote and depends
on too many contingencies. In support Of the WILL
1t was argued that the object Of the testator was to
create charity, and numerous cases were cited to
show that the courts, both IN this country and in
England, were disposed to favor such a construc.
ton Of wills as will sustain charitable devises and
requests that, il this disposition Of the tesator is
void for perpetiy and accumulation, then the will
OF Franklin was so too and that never was oues-
toned. The opinion of the supreme court has not
yet been published, tut | presume they view il as
did the court below, where il was held that the pro
visions for making loans, though not strictly Gre