The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-04-22
COU r T s.
u~-NN~N~' VII Case.
The AssoI AGO., lsr0R-- DsGi VEnY-
D"A" AM" REVOCATION.

sofiaME md Cecilia Hotfecs 70. . ".
"nNn -o'-1ane hodsrk Wills, his u!fs, Charles 4
rs Moaaao WIS and El.a A. - WIZ, .yr W.
n'ks' Alice Et0enia WiRs, Maah, Deianes IA,
W'ns, annette HiMs and (athayine Yills, ~ xor
ana .1a'Sa Rone, has w!fe, Walter Kane, Dslan,, ~
Jr, Nicholson Harr. Louisa Kane John inres Kone,~
Emily aston Zone Ro1. Rore and Sarah H., his 'cife,
WHiiom w. A. BorcA, Eliza d. Bored Agnes Boree',
Sophia r. Bcreei, Alfred M EorcI, Robert Bored, Jr'
Gabrielle c. NoHbeck, Cecilia Norbeok and William ~
hSor' Daniel Lord, Washington i,1ing, Ja'nes Gdpdt'n,
ana John Jacob Asor Jr executors Of John Jacob hSo
geceaa' ana trustee a''dy his wu w'uia" b. AS0' ana
ROOSEVELT, 1.-The late Mr. Aston il appears sometime
before his death executed his grand daughter, Mrs
Eoreel deed ior the house on Broadway N which ne
ten resided and in which about year afterwards he
died, and the lot connected with it, extending through 70
Mercer street Whether this instrument, under the cir
eumstancss detailed in the evidence ever took elect and
If so, whss Is is operation upon the devise on thc
same and the adjoining premises to Mrs B. and her
three sisters, previously made by .e VIII o. , mr.
effect by delivery, wills by death; deeds, as SUCH
may be executed in the presence OF one witness, and
wthsut any accompanying woyds wills require two W.T.
nesses and declaration the tssa.or at the t,ne, show
ing hrs knowledge Of thu character OF the Instrument Tic
instrument controversy was excsuted tire presence
OF single witness and With decluaOn OF its nature or
contents. 1t had all the forms Of deed and none OF tho
forms of will II could not therefore, operate A. tes-
tamentary disposition intended, 10 certainly was,
10 take effect after death II must be gcDd deed, or
good for nothing; in other words there mast have been
and acknowledging, however strictly complied with were
Of avail Was there then such devery7-not OF the
house and lot, for that, is conceded remained IN tie
actual occupancy OF Mr. Aston till his deathbut Oh the IN
stument OF conveyance Delivery where 1t Is not direct
10 the party named in the instrument being very much If
not altogether matter of intention must depend upon the
state of things existing and the language and occurrences
as the time. Now Mr. Aston, long previously to the date
of this deed had made his WILL giving the house in ques
ton ans the three Others adjoining to the four sisters named
being children Of his daughter, Mrs. Iangdon, for
their respective lives with reanders over to their issue
and none, to the surviving ssters-with certain
powers also under certain prescribed restrictions OF leas
ing selling and improving He subsequently ascertaned
from the Judicial history of the state that
'trusts powers, conditions limitations and other DISPOSE
TONS however "intendcd in al! things TO be made
conormable TO law" were by the courts frequently
''deemed invalid" This is shown by the language
have quoted, which used by him in tho
codcii made in january, 1883 And he may DO
so far at least as his immediate home was concerned,
should be withdrawn from the vortex OF post no ga
ton AT all events Whatever were his motives II Is GER
tain that the FIRST of May f847 Mr. Astor without the
aid Of counsel caused Of his clerks 10 fill up printed
blank deed for the house and lo in question: in favor OF
Mrs Boree signed and sealed the instrument In the pre-
sence Of the clerk who became an aesung witness ana
handed il TO his son, William b. Aston with directions, IN
substance, to give to Mrs Boreei on ms MT As'or
proved by the aesng Witness and the proof cered ny
commissioner Of deeds that about two weeks afterwards
was by Mr. William Aston 10 the Registers Office
and there the 10Th OF May and that after the
recording II returned to and retained by Mr. William
b. Aston till his fathers DEATH and then handed TO Mrs or
quite clear that so far as the house and lot IN question
were concerned Mr. Astor ntenued-aho ha' us son UNI
derstood him as intendng-o substitute the deed for the
will convey the property absolutely and IN PRESENT. al
though for an estate interest to commence IN muo
The question hen rs can oeea DO ~ M oy way "
escrow to third party 10 De handeo 70 inc eucc uou
the happening OF event which certain to come TO pass
and which cannot, In the mature Oh Things, oe i's'I,o
longer than the continuance OF an exsung uesighAed
life Since the adoption ef the revised statutes, whatever
may have the old technical difficulties, freehold es
iate may DC crca.ed 70 cen' , a. - ~ t,or,on
its o
for longer period than tne estaoisnea ruies ao" i
Astor, therefore, might have maze ~ %
grand daughter OF tne nouse ne 'veS ~, .an.a sa
forever from the DAY OIL ms oeatn Su ' s ns s
Expressed IN ue pooy Vi uc ,an'u yin $3.50 81 ,,,ses
sau nnJ s ns" necsssarv The delivery of the
aon "ouu nav pe.u 80 = hd' r,v,hia IN lime would
@ I'M s o ~, h, r,da,aa,y although the actual
~ ~, h;c, Of Tho gf, were posponed IN the
enoymem o, ue s.pe, w w. my s nS po,sri
donor dea,n anu may no. ,s nnrj A. nro
y apSa, = 10 . .,ad that . ascd althourh purpor,np
posuon !. Is NOS dspS oa ' ~, , iS;, ac,ion
a. ri, oer,,on nav ,ms bc suspended or even defeated
, n H,r,na ~ M, ha,cennc of some ftnre event
MOI necessary una, sne er s =. @
wc,dc,i asI Eyen tho nutng On record is only prima
yoa nv rahn,,oS nv oroor Ts ohnsons Reports 54
ne n was so some extent in this case by the tes.
tmony of VIM b Astor who in answer to ques-
ION whether his father directed him 10 have this
deed recorded replied che was not sure
be,ber no did or no,ba would have been done at al
events il was part OF the details OF business Of the
liz
merely 10 preserve the evidence OF the deed without
,endinp an immediate absolute delivery Indeed the
monv h potve and twice or three times repeated that
The deed was handed 10 the witness with directions that
n WINS m he delivered 10 Mr. Borec after his fatner's
death II was not therefore, To be delivered 10 her be
fore but il was 10 he delivered to her all events for
death although future Il certain Unlike testamentary
dsp,on the act was irreyocable even in the donors
bfc time without the donee's consent II was pre-
rSev similar 10 The case Of coodcl against Pierce q
Mn $50 where the marty handed the deed 10 the drafts
mn, 40 tecn for the grants, aud 10 be delivered absolutely
am Tho ornnor denlb unless both parties before that
oyoni should demand ia surrender The case OF Rnggcs
ognns, lawson ia J. r. 2s5) was sti stronger There
cher made deed in favor of two OF his children hand.
Inc n M n third norson 10 he delivered 10 them after his
death sbould he die without making n will The grantor
having died ntesate and the deed having tereupon
acvc,ed a held by The court 10 be valid and effect
,i NOT Outstanding IL royocabe character In
,he grantor' lie time by an act entirely optional with
he gran,or alone fbis case although referred
,at and commented ON by the court in 20
WcndcIl "a MAS moi oycrruled IL IL open
M Doubt IN grave cri,cisrn How an instrument, cx.
ccu,ed M ,ake c, ON the grap,ors DEATH and remaining
snb,cc M tbcn 40 his absolute power Of revocation by
I car no dls,ingu,sbed In principle from tsarnecn.
,,rv n is MOI easy 10 pcrcciyc For the pre-
80 .,y,so haxcxor 4, is suerint 10 cav that this Il