The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1900-04-27
The Instrument and It's CudIclIs Were Pro.
hated In the Year 1866.
QUESTIONS OF LAW THAT ARE RAISED
TM Total Amount Of the Estalss lnvolvsd 10 tho
Present Litigation Was $4,000 Whom :
Tho Mgl Was hobatsd.

The case OF Elizabeth Gallagher. ct
al, VS. Rhode Island Hospital Trust
Company. ct al, was heard by Chief
Justice Matteson and Justices Stiness
and Tillnghast today on bill, answers
and proofs. The bill prsys for the con-
struction of the Will and codicils OF the
late Mrs. Rhoda Newcomb, and for dis
tribution Of certain funds held by the
respondent the Rhode Island Hospital
Trust company. as trustee under the
will and codicils. and in certain other
capacities.
The complalnants are Elizabeth and
George Gallagher. the only children and
issue OF Rhoda Newcombs deceased
grandson, George Gallagher: Henry y.
Gallagher, a guardian OF Rhoda New
comb and brother OF George Gallagher.
deceased; and Charles q. Nichols, ex-
ecutor of the will OF Rhoda Newcomb's
deceased daughter. Charlotte Il. Math-
ewson. The answering respondents are
the Rhode Island Hospital Trust com
pany, the trustee under Mrs. New
combs will and codicil, and also the ad-
mlnistrator with the will annexed OF
the estate OF Rhodas deceased son,
Charles X. Newcomb, and also the
holder I'm its individual capacity OF GER
tain funds in dispute derived from
Charles X. Newcomb and Charlotte u.
(Newcomb) Mathewson; Mary l.. New
comb the only daughter and issue OF
Rhoda's deceased son. Henry s. New
comb, the younger; and four infant
children OF the complainant Henry ".
Gallagher.
A number of other persons and cor
porations. to which certain contingent
interests were given by the will were
made parties respondent TO the bill, but
did not answer and the answer was
taken as confessed against them. The
only answering respondent whose in
terests are adverse TO the complain
ants interests is MARI l.. Newcomb.
A COMPLICATED CASE. 9
The facts the court has 20 deal with
In this case extend over nearly three
quarters of "a century and are so nu-
merous and complicated as To be al
most bewildering." 50 counsel say.
The questions of law to be considered
are classified by complainants' counsel
under two main heads: First, what
was the effect Of a decree OF the court
entered I'm 1853 and, second, what ef-
feet did the codicils executed by MRS.
Newcomb have upon her will?
The material facts admitted on the
pleadings and established by the evil
dence complainant's counsel summar-
ize as follows
will probaied in 1926 gave the resi-
due of his real and personal estate TO
his wife. Rhoda, during her widow
hood and IL she should Sntinue un-
married until her death then to his
children by her in such proportions az
die intestate, among the children
equally.
"Rhoda Newcomb survived until
1866. and by her will. probated
IN that year. recited the power given
her by the will of Henry g. and for
the purpose of disposing OF her own
property and of making the directions
provided for in the wiz OF her hus-
band. gave all her estate real and
personal, and also the estate Of her
husband 10 her executor, William $.
Pa'tten. in fee in trust 10 set apart
therefrom the sum OF $4,000 each for
hDr son and daughter. Henry S. and
Elizabeth w Newcomb: and $4,000
each for her grandsons Henry N. and
George Gallagher. sons OF her de-
ceased daughter. Sarah Gallagher; the
$4,000 for the grandsons TO be set apart
out Of her husbands estate. and the
residue OF his estate TO be equally al
vided between Elizabeth. Charles. Hen
ry and Charlotte.
VALUE OF THE ESTATES.
The estate of the testatrixs husband.
Henry $. Newcomb. the elder consist
ed at Rhodas death OF S3S027.45 The
combined estates of the testatrix and
her husband consisted OF $4,000 and
upwards and shares OF stock In n num-
Der of corporations. One codicil provid-
cd that Henry ". Gallagher and George
Gallagher should receive the income
from $1,000 in addition to the income
from the $4,000 given to each by the will,
provided Charles n, and Charlotte Il.
should each receive an income of per
cent on their shares and Elizabeth w.
an income OF 5000 per annum.
The testatrix died on June 30. 1865 In
June. 1858. Mr.. Patten, executor OF Mrs.
Newcomb's Will got possession of her
and her husbands property as trustees
and apportioned the $4,000 thus re-
ceived and to pay over the income OF
the several parts as follows: SIS, 900 for
Charles X; $4,000 for Charlotte E.:$l2.-
600 daughter OF Henry =. the younger:
$12. 900 for Elizabeth W.: $4,000 for Henry
N. Gallagher: $4,000 for George Galla-
CHER. the elder The latter died after
the testatrix and the income OF his
$4,000 was paid to his children. Eliza
beth and George Gallagher. There were
other doa hs in the family
The question OF law raised by the
foregoing facts and others in the case
are: First, are compartments. Henry
~. Gallagher and Elizabeth and George
Gallagher entitled To continue TO re-
ceive the income given them by the will
and codicils OF Rhoda Newcomb and
second is the complainant Charles G..
Nichols as executor of Charlotte E
tNewcomb) Mathewson, entitled TO the
absolute interest I'm the residuary es-
tate transferred by Patten 10 Charles
and Charlotte ~hnd the survivors OF
them and the heirs OF such survivors,
and also o'the principal OF the $4,000
the income whereof was paid TO
Charlotte until her decease.
ADMINISTRATORS SUES.
John r. Knowles was the admlnIstra-
tor with the will annexed OF Rhodas
husband and brouGht q bill for q oon-