The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-03-12
WILL OF The LATE CHEF
JUSTICE FaIECL0fH DISPUTED.
Argument in Supreme Court Yesterday The
BAPTIST University against the Nephews
and Nieces.

The contest over the will of the late
Chief Justice w. T. Faircloth was argued
yesterday in the Supreme Court. 1t was
the case of the Baptist University VS..
Borden, executor.
The facts in the case are briefly these:
Judge Faircloth died on December 10Th,
1900, leaving no children, but widow
Mrs. E. e. Faircloth. His nephews and
nieces, Frank w Faircloth, Douglas b
Faircloth, Samuel l.. Faircloth and Cal
lie Faircloth, Clara A. Lane, Susan E.
Woodland, and Fannie NJ F'aircloth are
his feirs-at-law, and the defendants in
this case. The judge left will. in which
E. B. Borden was named as executor
After the probate of the will the widow
filed her dissent. claiming such share of
the estate a sshe would have been en-
titled to, if her husband had died intestate
Her years support $4,000, was allotted
to her. In addition, the estate is indebted
to her in the sum of $10,342 OF. with in
terest from February 18th. 1900.
About December 1st 1900 Judge Fair
cloth made a subscription of 81 900 to the
Baptist Female University, and In his
will left valuable real estate to the Uni
versity subject to Mrs. Faircloth's life
estate.
Judge Faircloth's estate, at the time of
bis death, was worth about $40, 900, about
100000 real estate and $4,000 personal
property. After the payment of debts,
except the one claimed by Mrs. Fair
cloth, and the expenses of administering
the estate. there remains about $34, 900
of personal property, which will not be
sufficient to pay the legacies provided
for, after the payment to Mrs. Faircloth
of her distributive share of the estate
and her claim of $40. 1929 OF.
Yesterday Messrs. w. N. Jones and
Battle and Mordecai appeared for the
Baptist University, r. A. Daniels for the
executor. and J. =. Woodland and w. T.
Dortch for the legatees, and w. c. Mum
roe for Mrs. Faircloth.
The Baptist University contends that
the dissent of Mrs. Faircloth accelerated
the devises to the University. and that
they are now entitled to the possession
of the property.
The legatees, tn nephews and nieces,
contend that it was the intention Of the
testator that they should have their
legacies paid out of the estate, and that
other parts of tn will must yield. If ne
cessary, to give effect to this intention
They further contend that the subscrip-
ton of 81 900 is without consideration and
does not create a binding obligation.
Other legatees mentioned in the will
contend that they are entitled to have
their legacies paid in public, without
abatement in favor of any others. Among
those other legates is the First Mission
airy Baptist Church of Goldsboro which
holds that it has become impossible to
carry out the intention of the testator
by reason of changed conditions since
the making of the will, and that the loss
should not fall upon any one legatee, put
upon all proportionately.
Besides the facts mentioned above
Mrs. Faircloth adds that at the time OF
his death Judge Faircloth owned $4,000
worth of bonds of the State, $4,000 worth
of A. & N. c. r. r. bonds and $4,000 IN
shares of the Bank of Wayne. The real
value of these bonds is much above their
par value.
Mrs. Faircloth contends that in addition
to the two thousand dollars set apart to
her as her years support and her dover
that has already been allotted to her, she
sentitled to 10.S42.07 with interest from
the 18th day of February, 1900, and costs
an the Superior Court awarded to her by
the referee in the cases of Z. z. Fair
cloth VS. E. B. Borden, executor of w
T. Faircloth.
She further contends. that in addition
she is entitled to one-half of all personal
property or estate of every description
that came or should have come into the
hands of f. B. Borden, executor
She further contends that the invest
ment in the North Carolina and Atlantic
& North Carolina Railroad bonds and
the shares in the Bank of Wayne is a
wise and advantageous investment and
should not be distributed, and she con-
tends that she is entitled to one-holf
thereof in specie.