New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-08-16
T[GHE'S WILL PROBATED.
SURROGATE DECIDES INTENT OF THE
DECEDENT rs PLAINLY EVIDENT.
CONTESTANTS DEFEATED ~ THEIR CONTENTION
THAT THE INSTRUMENT MUST BE RE


CORDED IN BLANK.
The will Of Richard Tighe the eccentric Old man
pho for many years lived In and owned the ony
remaining private house In Union Square ana VINO
left An estate reported to amount 10 about S2V""t
WA admitted to probate by Surrogate Fizg RAID
Yesterday The contest over the will began about
two years ago The reasons for the contest IN
volved about twelve legal technicaites
The oninlon Of the Surrogate in admitting the VIII
to probate is interesting from the TACT tna' 'he
manner Of writing the document was made thc
chief rea son FOR the contest. The body OF the VIII
is in the handwriting Of Tighe's deceased wife The
pan Of the will is 10 divide the estate into one hun
drcd PARTS, the names Of the persons who are 10
receive these shares appear in the running "ri'l"1
Of the will end the intention OF the decedent was
evidently 70 bequeath his entire estate TO the bene-
nciaries named The pro rata of shares Wnlch -
70 be allotted to each Of the henefciares was.
however originally left blank. There nov appears
In these hlanks in some Instances pencil writ
Ing which had been erner wholly or pafuy
erased and in other instances ink writing dnereht
from that in the body of the instrument In the ma
terial employed. and appearing over the peh'l'
writings wholly partially CELEBRATED Inc con-
testants declare that the burden rests on the pro-
ponen to explain these erasures and obliterations
and satisfy tho Court by competent and satista =
tory evidence that the viii rs I, now appears was
I'm that condition when executed by the decedeht;
and that. in the absence If such explanation the
Court must Hnd that the will must be recorded III
blank. thus rtuilly defeating the undoubteh m
tent of the de .cdeni 10 distribute the estate among
the individuals named in the paper and giving 10
distant relatives for whom the deceased made no
provision and whom ne IL not shown 10 have ever
known personally.
Surrogate FITZGERALD in his opinion said:
There is no statutory legal requirement that n
viii shall he drawn on particuiaf kin1 o. rnt
nor with the same ink. nor exclusively IN INK no.
all Al one time. and there Is no presumption IN.
blank spaces left for the insertion OF names or
amounts in a will were hlled in after execution
in using lead pencil 10 mi mp he spaces left for the
insertion OF the number If shares the d'crd"nI WAS
had riy.ned into determination he used m" more
LASTING md more disnihed matcria-ink 1t seems
iancc ~ using the more durable met nod. ior We
md that in ont Of tn" fourteen spaces Ieit tor
imposed ink over m" penciliing. 1t is common eX-
pericncc even for practising lawyers 70 MI IN spas
delihcfa,ion Is required ara afterward 10 write
over it in INK the mai result Of tn dehberan2n:
who hsr The Gcccderi believed that II he left ih.
otbor rors Of tho Will filled out i'm lead pencil it
would havo had the same effect We cannot deter
mine: it l. sufficient say that the instrument be,
trayod the Intention % the deccdent 70 make hnal
d,s4o.it"r Of his property hy ink writing his fail
IRE to do 50 IN every instance cannot prevent tne
viii 80 far a. II carries out his Intention from
piopruudod consisted u the identical shCets now
presented At the time Of is execution and mat II
may be admitted 20 prohat" and r"cord'G WIN IN.
spaces GG IN VIII aI peR' IN a1neSr All" ied in
with Ink o. may he recorded as IT now appears IN
that material ,
Tho iulo iu regard 20 the presumption as 10 wheh
lions Of suspicious nature
arr.aring iu a will were made which Is rflen upon
b. the contestants 20 defeat the VIII or the de-
case Tho pencil wri!ng and marks which have
b.en made The occasio for invoking the rule men
toned regard IA have previously said. as purely
d.fih,r,f.vn or tentative aud In seems that
tha ink writing which Indicated he testaiors hnal
d.forui lttioi and action iS FOR the purpos" ~ tlc
di.noeliicn I this matter 20 be treated as II the
q, ucilng had never been made I'm such cases there
could Dee no doubt that tho difference IN character
81 such writing and Of that Of he body Of m" VIII
would afford no ground for saying that such witt
INK Wa inserted ln the Will after its execution
The Will ia admitted 20 probate.