New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1888-01-01
TWO VIII. CASES DECIDED.
MRS. PARAN sTEvENs's PETITION DENIED.
THE SURROGATE SAYS THE EXECUTORS AND TRUs-
TEES UNDER HER HUSBANDS WILL SHOULD
NOT BE REMOVED NOw-HER APPLICA-
TON MAY BE- RENEWED.

TEES UNDER HER HUSBANDS WILL SHOULD
NOT BE REMOVED Now-HER APPLIcA-
TON MAY BE- RENEWED.
Among the last official acts Of Surrogate Rol-
Inns, whose term of Office expired yesterday, was
the handing down of his decisions in the famous
Paine will case and the Paran Stevens case. James
ii. Paine, the miser, according TO the finding OF
the Surrogate executed will leaving all his
property to John H. Wardwell. This will was not
in existence at the time of faine's death, but the
Surrogate declares that it was not fraudulenty
destroyed and that its execution was not induced
by fraud or undue influence; but he auds thaV
Paine did not possess testamentary capacity ana Oh
that ground he declined to admit the Will TO pro-
bsts.
The decision of Surrogate Rollins on the pc
tition of Mrs Paran Stevens for the removal OF
the executors and trustees under her husbands
will is adverse to her application, but while the
Surrogate decides that action OF this KIND
should be taken pending the trial of suit IN
the Supreme Court involving nearly the same
issues as were presented in this proceeding, he
says that after that suit is decided she Will have
an opportunity to renew her application to the
Surrogate if she wishes TO-
THE CASE EXPLAINED.
The nature of the proceeding is thus set forth
in the decision
This dccCdent dcd IN April, lo'E, lcdNiHP TWO
mentary papers, ono purporing TO be WIN ana tne
other a cOdcil, both Of which were admitted 10 pro
bate I'm this court soon AFTER the dccedent uealn
He left him, surviving his widow Marietta X stevens,
and three children Mrs. Ellen ;. Mclcher, wic OF John
L. Mclchcr Mary +. stevens, now Mrs Paget, ana
Henry L. stevens, deceased His widow was
named In the will proper cxecutrix, and Charles
g. stevens and John L. Melchcr, the testators sonin
law were named as executors. All three qualified,
received letters tcstamcntary, and have since actcu
By the terms Of his will the tcsator made several
I'm fayo 4 mis- Including the provision
following: bcQuest and devise of ST. 900 900 I"
which shall he included at their fair value at my
deccase the premises known as No. / store, safest
block In Boston. Mass.") to Charles g. stevens and
George f. Richardson in trust to hold, invest and man
age the same as a trust fund and estate for her Uhe
wdow'S) benefit during her natural life.
and upon her deccasc to divide the principal OF sad
fund and estate among his hs @ Ms s,evnns d.
rccS the division of his rcslduary estate into three
parts Ono Of these parts he g Fen 70 Mccbsr aa
life, with remainder over another part he gives 10
Stevens and Mocher and his (the testaorsl widow, IN
trust for Mary Fiske stevens. now Mrs Pagct' Win
remainder, etc The proceeding now before the court
is brought by Marietta r. Stevens for the purpose OF
procuring a decree revolving the letters testamenlaly
of Mclcher and Stevens, removing stevens and Rich
ardsOn from their Offices her tcstameniay trustees
and removing stevens and Mecher as the testament
AIRY trustees of her daughter Mary, now Mrs Pagct.
SOMEBODY Is AT FAULrIN THE CASE
The Surrogate says that it is somebody's fault
that the estate has not long since been fully adj
ministercd and that the trusts for which it makes
provision have not long since been set up But
he says the Surrogates Court is court of divided
jurisdi ction ard he adds:
Many OF the allegations in The petition before me
even whe. read in connection with the dcnlaS In re
spOndenrs answer, arc OF such character that II
they were submitted to court OF general equity
powers they would require serious consideration, and
Indeed, might warrant, without further investiga
ton the granting whole In part the relief
which this petition seeks
The Surrogate holds that he has no reason in
this case to exercise the power given him to re-
woke an executors letters, where by reason OF
his having wasted or improperly applied the money
or other assets in his hands, or invested money IN
securities unauthorized by law, or otherwise I'M
providently managed or injured the property com
mitted to his charge, or by reason of dishonesty
of other misconduct . he Is unlit foI
the due execution of his Office" The Surrogate
cannot find evidence, he says, Of misconduct on
the part Of the executors and trustees as charged
by the petitioner
Speaking of the suit pending in the Supreme
Court between the parties the Surrogate says that
" most of the matters in controversy between the
parties hereto are involved in that action in such
a manner that they may he fully determined by a
decree to be therein entered" He holds that the
executors and trustees were not guilty OF mis-
conduct in bringing that action
THE DECISION ARRIVED AT.