New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-01-25
MIR. FAYERWEATHER'S PLAN.
WHAT HE WISHED TO HAVE DONH WITH
THE RESIDUE OF HIS ESTATE.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS C. RICH An EXECUTOR
OF THE WILL~-MEMoRANDUM GIVEN
HIM EY TILE TESTATOR

HIM Ky TIE TESTATOR
The trial of the suit brought by the. several COL,
leges who benenciaries under the will OF Daniel
Il. FayeTweather resumed before Judge Truax.
In Special Term Supreme Court. to-day. Ex-Judge
Arnoux appeared in behalf Of Thomas c. Rich
of the executors and trustees and John +. Parsons
for the other two executors. II. H. Waugh and James
l.. Buckley moved for dismissal the ground
that the plaintiffs had shown that Daniel Il.
Fayerweather ever intended that they should be
benehciaries TO the residue Of his estate. and that
they had not shown sufficient cause OF action.
Judge Truax denied the motion
The first witness called was .omas c. Rich
who drew up parts OF the will and was one of the
trustees and executors. Mr. Rich made a draught Of
the WILL a paper was handed to Mr.. Rich which
ne identified IL was admitted only after long
argument. This letter was given to Mr.. Rich by
Mr.. Fayerweather the day the will was drawn.
The letter said that he hoped his heirs would allow
his various requests to public institutions to so
without contest.
Mr. Rich allowed to put in evidence all
the correspondence that passed between him and Mr.
Fayerweather relating to the will and the codicis
All tended to show THAI the residue of the Fayer-
weather estate after the nine provisions had been
compiled with to be divided share and share
alike. among those colleges named in n private
memorandum, which was drawn up and placed in
sealed envelope and sent Mr.. Rich. This
envelope was not to be opened until after Mr..
sustaining and denying objections Of the dozen
more lawyers present. one side declared that this
line ot testimony was OF privileged character and
should not be admitted. On the other hand Mr..
Root and his associates held that In becoming a
'ruStee Mr.. Rich stepped ont OF the category OF
counsel and into that OF a person responsible the
i"Ithiui Performance OF IA duty assumed volun-
t1rlly by him.
on March o. 1889. Mr. Fayerwea Their wrote to Mr.
Ken saying that h had decided TO cut Off Hampton
decided to give Cornell and North Western uni
Vcrslties SlVIo each. In this letter he bequearhel
SjOO each to Rogers and Blake: 10 Could Carpcn-
TER and stone. 500 each 10 Carpenter $50: to
James who used 10 open the store. SOD: to Dixon.
sltO: to Miss Joyce. SUs. in addition TO the pro-
3. IL and H. showed that Mr.. Fayerwea'her wished
the specific bequests carried out per private
memorandum held by Mr.. Rich. Then Mr.. Root
introduced the original memorandum setting forth
that all OF the residue OF the teT1tors estate. after
the nine articles OF TN" will had been compiled with.
Buckley and Thomas g. Rich. 10 them and their
heirs forever" Subsequent TO this Mr.. FIycr-
weather evidently thought his viii not entirely
clear for he wrote 10 Mr.. Rich to what prospect
there Of the VIII being contested. Mr.. Rich
explained the law TO him and the effect the tenth
third clause He said that there could b" no con-
fid'. the viii. cOdicS and memorandum We're
quite explicit and not contradictory 10 each other.
on November H. lSn Mr.. Rich wrote 10 Mr.. Fayer-
weather that II was the Intention OF himself and
Mr.. Buckley to carry out the stpulat pursuant
to Mr. FaV"rwcarh.r's memorandum. lie did not
wish 10 be- other than a legater or trustee 10 the
beneficiary in any manner or form. and would CON
duct himself ia accordance with those IDEAS and In
accordance with che Will Itself AMI the memorandum
The viii be- resumed this morning.