New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-07-09
THE COURTS.
@. r. ROBERTS WILL SUSTAINED.
ITS MANY EMBARRASSING PRovIsIoys-REsULrs

O. R. ROBERTS WILL SUSTAINED.
ITS MANY EMBARRASSING PRovIsIoSs-RE or
MAKING A WILL WITHOUT A LAWYERS HEIP-
THE REQUESTS TO ROBERT COLLEGE.
Ihe suit of Christopher x. Robert, executor,
etc., against the trustees OF Robert College and Others
was Drought for the construction Of the will Of the Late
christopher X Robert OF New-York and involved quee
IONS OF an important and somewhat novel character
Inc estator died In 1873 possessed Of large and
personal estate, leaving wife and four children After
provision made for the widow and the specific devise of
certain real estate Long Island the ts,ator directed
MS executors TO sell all his real and personal estate
The real property in the City Of New-York he directed
should be sold only after three weeks notice by adj
vertisement The proceeds OF the sale were to be dt
vided into fifty equal parts and distributed as directed
His sons and daughters we're each to receive certain
number of such parts II they were respectively
alive at the time OF such distribution and
in Of their deaths before such distribution thel
be paid 10 their issue. The will further
provided that upon such distribution ten OF such equal
shares be paid tho trustees OF Robert
College, at Constannope, the principal to be invested
by the trustees and the income only IN be used for the
general uses and purposes Of the college,"
unless the exigences OF the college should
require the use OF the principal. In the
college was discontinued. the shares set apart
for it to be applied by the trustees such
they might deem best for the general purposes OF
the nationaItes Of the Turkish Empire" The viii also
provided OF the death Of any Of his children
before the testator died. such chds share 70
his If any, in default thereof to the testators
surviving children their issue. There a direction
the will that any Indebtedness OF any Of the children
to the testator might appear by his books Of ac-
count was to be charged against their shares
respectively. The executors authorized not TO
sell the realty devised within period II three years
from the demise OF the testaor, IT, in their discretion
oYside ah and u and
were 70 be divided seml-anuay untn the estate
was finally distributed. aud principle gwen
any grandchd until he should arrive at the age Of
This will had oeen drawn entirely by the teststor and
the legality Of its provisions considered be
doubtful that the supreme Court was called upon
20 pronounce upon t1er validity Various positions
were by different persons Interested in the
estate some claimed thai the will VOID ia tot0S
Dry being contrary 10 the staute relative 10
trusts aud corporations others. tas that the principal
trusts OF the wi we're void inasmuch a. they pended
the power Of alienation for a period Ion than
lives ing the time OF the death Of the testator
Opposition 4de To clauses the viii
by when the BOOKS VI the testator he taken
modifying or eHaAgiAg its positive provision on the
round tAat they 0pefaed a. nJn- esaneLtiry dispo
stOns." The viii sustained TO all it, provisions
Oy Justice Van brunt at special Term aud IL. decision
was affirmed ~ the General Term Tue LATER court
gave It's opinion although It lad IN the main agreed
TO sustain The WIN, INA; tnere were many s g
determined by the Court OF Appeals.
At It's last sitting the Court Of Appeals rem
dered dc .ision sustaining the viii, inciud
ing the requests TO Robert College, which
|
writing Opaon OF the court OF Appeals says tna
the points OF viii not in cDntravendon OF
st.tule a-alnss the restriction alterations 20
period embraced by Two lives IN being because tue trus
tees nad power alternating any time within tue
ume specified, and that the ownership Of the
converted not tied up beyond the restricted period
because executors mac trust estate, merely
naked discretionary power subject to the actual owner
ship Dencncares the interests OF such benecarie
becoming or the subject
" the power OF sale the
Lresp ectye Of the question whether the estate
was Jno trustees they merely
VI power there fact undue suspension Of the
power OF alienation, since they could any afteJ
death o. Tie testtIOr have conveyed III pos
session and tRAt the restriction OF "a required JhTco
Weeks notice OF actual sus pension 81 owner
ship the power OF .lenauon, but mere pr ldentIa
arrangement The. Court also held tbat hmita
tiou or power OF the executors TO make sale &c
a discretionary period or years duration
did not create a trust period Tor any line nYOvings
SUSPENSION VI tne power OI alienation, and that tLef
any undue suspension VI The power OF aeHsuOr
IN the cau-es the HlL providing distribution oil
the among the children II they should be alive al
the time OF dIstriDuOn tue legal theory o the viii being
nat the disLrOutIve suares became vested the de
Subsequent legaIees should the first appJntees not SIR
vIve until diss butD and that the pOtpOnenIeut o the
distribution for convenience % the estate and
| a restriction ON Alienation.
On principe, the legacy TO the Robert Col
ege sustained, co rt holding also that the re-
tsrciioD OF tine income only OF the shares to the college
ala create Illegal prrpctuty As % the clauses
in the will providing tIat shares should be diminished
by any amOints Indebtedness against the children
appearing c books or the test3ur, the Court held
TIA. TINS ase such a Clange Dy afferOcolr
IL AS being an uuattcsted tcstaueDlary Wnung. Inc
will was therefore, upheld III all 10 parts and deci
slOns below affirmed.
| James W. Gerard and Aaron ]. VanderpOel appeared
for The will Thomas ohe8rman for Robert College,
and C. f. Stone and j. =. Gray for various heirs aud
egatees