Daily Yellowstone journal., 1888-04-28

arising as to me sruue OF the testator's
p-.:TTi, undue influence, ETC., but it is OBJ
vious that this mere statement, unsup-
ported by evidence, could scarcely ''hold
law" Then, again, men formerly gave
back their souls to their Maker, once
came across the probate Of a will of a
seafaring man, which an: First, l
humbly beQueath my soul TO God, my
Maker, b~eSeeching his gracious acceptance
and forgiveness of all my sins; my body
/ give to the earth or sea, as il shall
please him to order. Ny worldly affairs
/ dispose of as follows"
Most lawyers, while properly ~resenting
interference with their province, ''red
tape" by "amateurs," often reap a rich
harvest from the usual bungling of such
meddlers. p I remember a case where a
party had his will prepared, and n codi-
Gil afterward Endorsed in proper legal
form. Requiring a second ~colicil, he
thought IL an easy matter TO add il him.
self and thus save expense. lie wrote
il all right, taking the previous n for a
guide, and called in two credible per-
sons, who ailiSed their names as ''wit-
nesses' TO lis due execution But the
testator had unfortunately omitted 10 sign
it, and it doubtless formed 4 rico point
of law for the court TO decide as TO
whether, being written by the testator
himself, combined, Of course, with the
witnesses signatures and testimony, it
constituted execution Of the colicil.
The term ''Cut off with a shilling" has
become the subject Of 4 stage play, and
it bears a well known relation to wills.
| question, however, whether there are
many authentic instances Of its having
been actually employed in writing, being,
perhaps, more significant Of q fathers
threat 10 an offending son. / did, how
ever, come across a genuine case in the
improved will Of a father, written by
himself in a memorandum book, in
which he said Inter alia): Il give to my
son John one shilling, sterling, money Of
Great Britain"
The writer ono prepared officially the
will Of a tradesman, Of which no one but
he and myself knew the contents. In
agine, therefore, my surprise when he
told me soon after that he had been in
formed that his will had been seen and
that the contents were common talk. l
assured him that it was a mistake, but
he stated that it must be true,
as his informant had told him
some IFS provisions. It tran
spired subsequently, that the testator
had made n previous will which he had
DESTROYED, SO far as tearing it up was
concerned, but it had been carelessly
thrown in the ash pit and some work.
men had been mean enough to put it to-
gether and had posted it up in a work
shop near By. 1t was ultimately re-
covered.
| was intimately acquainted with a
lady. Of whose father it was said, that
the family solicitor, with the concurrence
Of the widow, had procured execution"
after death, and it is said that previous to
the ''signing, I" which was done by the
lawyer holding the dead mans hand, a
spider was placed in the deceased's
mouth, which is supposed to have con-
stituted life in the body!'
Some men in making the most simple
Wins hAFbAl kINi hh W AAN wiz. "AtAAAAlH
to be sufficiently explicit and coElpre-
hensive, have given her Everything I
possess in this worll.'
1t frequently happens that persons buy
blanks of wills and fill them up TO save
legal expense, bul it is a very unwise pro-
ceeding, and il is not generally under
stood that wills not submitted for pro-
bate within a reasonable time after the
death Of the testator renders the executors
liable TO a penalty, which is, however,
seldom enforced.
As | am speaking Of documents ! may
mention the case Of Il lease exemplifying
''biter BIT" where a landlord prepared
for a tenant the lease Of farm himself,
and wishing TO retain all rights Of sport
ing omitted all mention Of such, the re-
suit being that those rights, not being
properly excepted or reserved, became
unquestionahly and exclusively the ten-
ant's.-Detroit Free Press.