New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-07-18
THE CITY'S RIGHTS As AN HEIR.
TT re- ENTITLED TO RECEIVE A REQUEST OF
$4,000

$4,000
In decision handed down yesterday Surrogate
Arnold declares the will of Angelina Crane in 50 far
al II leaves $4,000 to the Mayor Aldermen ard Com
monalty OF the city OF NewYork for the erection OF
drinking fountain to be legal
This was the only part OF the will attacked and
Surrogate Arnold says In his decision, that no OBJ
lection was taken 10 the form Of the will nor was
there any allegation OF undue influence or mental IN
capacity
Mrs. Cranes estate was estimated at $1,000 After
making certain charitable requests. amounting 10
$4,000 and nominal bequest Of s. 10 her only child
Edith H. Simmons. Mrs. Crane bequeathed the resi-
due OF her estate 70 the city for the erection OF
drinking fountain In her memory.
The daughter contested the bequest TO the city on
the ground that the city had no power TO accep;
charitable requests and power 10 accept trus
FUNDS or execute trust; that the bequest was void
ana IN Violation Of the statute OF perpetuties and for
'ndennftencss and uncertainty I, WIG also alleged
Oh pehai OF the contestant that the will al! un-
natural one, because 1t substantially deprives the only
child OF the tesator from al share in the estate
A decision Of the Supreme Court OF the United
States is cited by Surrogate Arnold The part o..
the decision quoted Is as follows:
Mtiumc.pas, and public corporations may be the
subjects OF pubic and private bounty. This Is
and gifts OF every species OF property directed 70
the coTpo.aton and FOR It's use and benefit intended
obligations or tighten the burden OF their citizens
are valid in law. n the absence OF disabling or re-
strainng statutes
The surrogate then refers to the rights 10 pur-
chase. receive and hold all kinds Of property con-
ferred by their ancient charters on the Mayor
Aldermen and Commo1alty Of the City Of New
York. He adds:
These charters were confirmed by Chapter 5S O.
the Laws OF l73c, by Chapter 335 OF the Laws o,
1913 and ratified and continued by the Consoida-
ton act OF 1882 The corporation would therefore
appear to be entitled TO take gift OF personal
property by bequest
ID not understand the contestants here as de-
nyns this, but COntending that the gift under
consideration II associated with a condition which
Limits ITS use TO an expenditure fo~ particular
purpose that IL Is Request trust for that pu--
pose. and that the eCatee has not the legal right
70 take the GIT IN trust otherwise for such pur.
pose. do not think that the gift hero was in
tended ny me testatrix or should be construed 10
ne so limited. that II Is qualified by the condition
mat Il shall he expended in the erection os drink
i1c FOUNTAIN 70 her memory. Whether the EXPIRES
sion, ~ such expenditure he sanctioned BY Law
refers 20 the general powers OF the corporation In
that respect or possible necessity for permission
or other action on the Of the Board Of Alder
men or other department OF the city government or
"ther legislation. II Is quite clear from her will
that she intended 10 give the whole % her -esjuary
estate 70 the corporation and that she did not in
tend 70 de intestate 10 the same-a condition
which. II Is 70 be presumed. she knew would do
feat her clearly asserted purpose 70 dslnher, be-
daughter by giving her the sum % s. and no more