New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1868-11-16

JI.D.r,' OPINION ~ FULL
If.ou OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
~ Nov 1.-The famous Rowland VIII
t4,1, has engaged the attention Of the Courts ana
,,llic ,earlv three years, and which, from the vast
,no involved and the sensational circumstances that
ben brought light has become one OF the causes
l,s Of this country, decided to-day as Tar as inc
d states Circuit Court concerned, and the validity
~ the wal, was established. The announcement that the
decision would be given this forenoon attracted large
coneourse of spectators, comprising many members OF
the bar many prominent citizens and large
number OF the residents Of NewBedford, in which city
most OF those concerned live or have lived The history
OF this case is briefly as follows: On the
% day Of July, 1865 Miss Sylvia Ann How
land Of New-Bedford died. leaving property valued at
sa200O01 of which she beQueathed to her niece Miss
IIetty H. Robinson NOV Mrs. T. H. Green OF New-1oID
ouehal and the other halt to various friends servants
aud public charities. BY the accumulation OF INTEREST," Ho
property has been raised to about S2jO00OO very Soo
after the death Of the testator the began TO comics.
the will and the case was taken before the Probate
in New Bedford and afterwurd before the supreme Co
Of Massachusetts, Finally owing TO the IenO'
niece to New York the case was transferred u @
States Circuit Court sitting in Boston ana !" lin
1866 the niece Mrs Green, hled a OIL ~ = ,sso
the Clerk Of the Circuit Court. which averred th"I III '
her aunt and she made mutual wills, WIZ" w.
changed and that by the terms oI an U.s., ~
made by them both no subsequent VIII N -,
- IN, either without due notice belng
giVp
nor nrorcrtv substantially to Hey, and Hct'y "lueu
nor propertv amounting to several hundred tlous"nu
dollars 10 her heirs if she should have any anu " No "
- nlc charities The reason for these acuos was s'"'e
10 he sylvia Ann Harland's alleged hatred OF He'y
Father and her desire that in case Of Hetys DEATH ne
.l,orl1 NOT become posscssor Of her property Inc
.o,nulainout claimed in her bill that her aunt
had given her notice OF chahge Oh
her will, and, therefore, even Tue
contested will was really made by her. 1t could not stand
1otr4t and
under the W ill-whose names Thomas MandcH, l. d.
Nandeu George Rowland, and William A. Gordon, all Oh
New Bedford, replied general denial OF all the com
planauts allegations and cOntended moreover t"t sue
had forged certain portion OF the will that she produced
The case was argued before Judges Clifford ana Lo"eH
cgtbe United states Circuit Court in this city, year ago
last August and over a week was consumed year OF
more had previously been spent in taking deposuons
the printed copies OF which ill a volume OF over 'hou
sand pages Among the counsel employed were Mt siu
ney Bartlett the Hon. b r Curtis, and eX-GoY Cuord
for the complainant and the Hon. B. F. Thomas and the
Hon Thomas d. Eliot for the respondents The Court
has taken until make up its opinion and 1t Is IN
derstood that consultation has been enjoyed with all the
members Of the Supreme Bench 'at Washington An ap
peal was taken to bring the before the United states
Supreme Court but 1t is not probable that the result can
be changed. Annexeds
THE DECISION IN FULL.
Cucvir CouR1 or 1Hr UNITED Dsrmcr-
U., Ro Ss0E n E s1o ss Tbons. Msrd,neh
CLIFFORD, J.-Compainant alleges that she was the
neice and sole heiratlaw of Sylvia Ann Rowland de
ceased leaving will disposng OF her.estate that IN the
month September she the complainant was pos
sessed in her own right Of property derived from her
mother who the sister Of the testatrix that her
aunt then IN full lie, at that time at variance with
the father OF the complainant aud was DESTROYS to ex
cude him from iuherug bg will otherwise, from the
complainant. any part Of the property she so derived
from her mother, exclude him, in she
the complainant should survive her aunt from Inherit
ing any part the property that She at the decease of
her aunt. might derive from her aunt's estate. Ac
tuatcd by those motives the bin OF complaint
alleges that the said Lydia Ann at III
same time requested the complainant to make will dis
posing OF her estate that in Of her docease befor
father he should not in any by will or Other
wise inherit part Of the property devised or TO
devised and promised the complainant, ishe would con
ply with that request that She the decedent would maxi
her viii in favor OF the complainant; and the allegation
Is that it at the time mutually agreed between
the parties that the respective Wills so to be made were
e1chau ged. and that each was TO have the pos
session Of the viii Of the other and that neither TO
make any will without notifying the other and re-
turning the others will TO be held exchange Per
Torrance OF agreement the part Of the complain
ant is also alleged the bill Of complaint. The substance
aud effect Of egaons that the complainant,
IN the pursuance Of her promise, did the same day
make aud execute Will In due form, by which all the
property she then had might thereafter acquire, was
given and devised to her issue, If any, and in default
thereof TO charitable ana that she did thereby
clude father from all benefit from the WILL specially
requested her that the event Of her dccase
before ahcr he would not by inheritance, other
wise be entitled % any part Of her estate that tie VIII
made and executed then delivered 70 her aunt, by
whom Kept during her life time, and among whose
papers vas found after dcccase Part performance
Of the contract the part OF the said Sylvia Ann aso
alleged the effect thar she NJ tho same time in conform
l with the promise. caused draft 20 be made OF her
VIII which was not then completed, but the ayeImcnt
is mat the completion OF Le same was postponed IN
the clear landing that the Will so drawn should be
executed and delivered TO the complainant under the
agreement whenever she should request he same TO DO
done aud she also that she did afterwards make
request and mat The said Sylvia Ann did the l1th
OfJanuaIy complete Sign ana Only execute that draft
her last will and tcsanent that before executing the
samo she signed the paper writing therein, called the
second page OF the WILL and that the attached
so the viii before the viii was signed and executed
Delivery o. tho VIII, SO made and executed 10 the COM
painaut in pursuance Of the agreement is also alleged
with The paper writing thereto attached and the com
planaut that the will made and delivered TO her
has ever since remained I'm her possession and that her
az time ID any way ever notified that the said
sylvia Ann had made or was about TO make any othfr
VIII Alleged breach Of agreement Is that nOtWithstaud
ing PROMISE, he said Sylvia Ann did make another
VIII bearing date sept l. $685. appointing therein the
Gil 10 the same bearing date Nov. 49, 1864, giving and
deyisng large part OF her property to divers
and corporations 10 he exclusion OF the complainant aud
that she and devised the residue Of her estate the
other three respondents in trust 10 the thereof
other provision for the benefit OF the complainant
whatever for her issue and that she aerward on
and personal estates Prayer OF the bill OF complaint IL
that the rstnamed respondent and executor be de-
planant. and that the other respondents may declared
10 hold the real estate in trust for her benefit and that all
the respondents be decreed TO account with and
deceased. Respondents admit that the complain
sylvia Ann Rowland. but they deny that the
latter at variance with the father OF complainant
alleged request but that the complainant herself
at variance with her father and that she had repeat