The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1893-07-20
LATEST
HEIRS Cannot INTERFERE.
City Solicitor COlXell's Opinion on
Dexter Training Ground Question.
STATUE TO THE LATE Mr.. DEXTER
WouId be No Infringement OF tho Terms
Of His Bequest-The Committee Votes
% Accept Mr. Clark's oner and to
Appropriate $4,000 to Carry 1t Out.

70 Accept Mr.. Clark's Oher and TO
Appropriate $4,000 to Carry 1t Out.
Down In room II in the City hall this
morning the special committee appoint
Cd 70 consider Mr.. Henry c. Clark's offer
20 give the city statue OF its greatest
benefactor. Ebenezer knight Dexter, held
amseting. Some time ago the committee
sopsidsred Mr.. Clark's offer and was In
.slined to accept IL Immediately, but GER
tain legal questions came up which
caused It to defer action until 1t had OBJ
tainsd the opinion OF the city solicitor.
Since that time City Solicitor Colwell
has been looking into the matter an |
vesterday notified the comm itee he was
ready to render his decision. 1t was to
hear this opinion and to take action on
the matter that the committee met this
morning.
Chairman Fuller was on hand promptly
and the other members were not slow In
assombling. Mr.. CoIwell was also pres
ent and after little pleasant prelimi-
nary skirmishing the session opened.
The chairman. requested Clerk Hayden
to read the opinion. and as ~ dealt WIN
. very important question--one that has
bssn discussed for years--it was listened
TO with the closest attention.
The Solicitors Opinion.
After the usual formal statement Mr..
e Colwell said the questions asked him
were:
Tirst-Would the erection OF the mon
ument as proposed violate the provisions
Of tho will of Ebenezer knight Dexter as
70 the use of said training ground 30 rs
to in any manner forfeit the same to the
heirs of said Dexter!
6econd-Would the erection of SAID
the nee granted to the public of said
around. q . training field, under the
6fovisions of the will of the donor.
Mr.. Colwell also said he had beer called
upon to suggest In what way statue
could b properly .pS permitted u to be erected
Clsrk's request.
Then the solicitor goes ON to say that
the land In question was given to the
town for training field. by virtue of the
sixteenth clause in Mr.. Dexter's will.
which he quotes IN full.
Then. the solicitor says, Mr. Dexter
died Aug. TO- 1924, and the donations
under his will to the town of Providence
including the training field were ac-
copted by the freemen Of the Town
% town nesting on Nov. %,
lX14. Mr.. Colwell construes such a.
grant ~ that contained In Mr.. Dsxter's
donation the duty Of making use Of the
aift IN accordance with the reasonable
Intent and meaning, - expressed by the
donor, for the benefit OF the beneficial
rfes-in this case. the public; and
e sss Fl ra ns ss t ns1os Allowed 10, h5 S Be
was intended, It II competent for the
bene6ciaries, that 10 the public. to make
application to the proper tribunal
20 Ontoin tho trustees, or those hold
ing the Gift under tho will, from
sGw,ns any ym such :. hod snS nn and ths
MT on their hands for the purpose in
tondedo By the doner. ANY failure on
the part Of the trustees or those holding
tho Gifs 70 make use Of it In accordance
With the intentions Of the donor works
40 forfeiture Of the gift to the heirs OF
) ne grant. Mr.. Colwell SAYS, is in fee
simple forever to the town of Providence
1or Che public use indicated.
The Second Question Answered.
\ TO the sseond question a. to whether
the erection Of statue will interfere
With the use granted to the public of the
ground a. . training field and deroga-
tieq of the rights of the people Mr.. Col
we'll says;
~Ip my view the erection OF a statue
ouoh - ID proposed could not be re-
1ardsd within the meaning Of the provis-
Ions Of said will M establishing any
but would be looked upon 81 IMPLY in the
light Of al adornment OF said ground and
in no sense diverting the use
Ing dsid any NOR. than 'ia% sne
ornamental trees planted about forty
egg 6s as sSs co 9, Of The
Qusst to that effect adopted in town
"If am correct In the view submitted
above Ia answer to the question pro-
pounded that the erection of the monu-
mont proposed works no forfeiture Co
gnsaed in ths light of ornamentation of
the grounds and not ns establishing any
now or conflicting use of tue ground In
QUESTION inconsistent with the provision
0f the will Of the donor. do not SEQ but
this covers any other suggestion called for
~ ths committees"
Ne lntszfsrsnce with Donors Intention.
Continuing. Mr.. Colwell says that any
oruamentation OF the training field should
bo 20 made and restricted az not to In ter
Ssro With its use a. intended py the
donor. Ornamentation in such form
aud carried to such an extent "A
g interfere with the intended use of
che ground would take on the nature of
OboeFuctfon to such use which the public
might we'll complain of aud ask in proper
way to be restrained.
"It would SEEM" he concludes, shat
The ground IA question could be
no more appropriately and thought
fully adorned than by such statue
- 70 proposed to be erec,e to the memory
of him, who not only by bis will gave
ehis very ground to The use of the public,
bat also In larger aud more affrctiug
token or his strong attach
meos TO his native town aud
out ~ an ardent desire to ameliorate the
concttt N Of the plor and
- contribute to their ,mfort an a
rolisf provided 1.-THE magnificent grounds
AID asylnm which bear his ma Q, an
4oT1n< testimouy OF his title OF "bene-
factor and friend Of the unfortunate"
The Commfttee Acts