Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-05-29

testate, and by the terms of his will
tiff is his sole iegatee.
The chief contention of the plain
tiff, as stated in The brief of counsel,
is, that as widow Of Henry w Hough
ton, who died without issue, she is
entitled to half IF the balance of
the principal of the trust fund as an
heir at law of her deceased husband.
Held: !. At the death of Henry
w. Houghton the balance OF the trust
property did not form part of his
estate. Under the viii he took only
life estate in the income of the one
fifth share of the residue. His heirs
81 law were not TO take the principal
Of the trust at his death by substi-
tuition for him, but as persons dssig-
mated in the will to take in their
own right something which he was
in no event II take. The gift of the
principal to them was substantive
gilt, and not a substitational one.
:. The general rule is that a will
is TO be interpreted according to the
laws of the country or state of the
domicil of the te5tator, since he is
those laws.
The determination of the question.
whether the plaintiff is an heir at law
of her deceased husband Henry w
Houehton. should be made according to
the laws of Maine. the domicie of the
testator, and not according to the laws
of Massachusetts, the residence of the
son, Henry w.
B. The testator used the expression
his heirs at law" to designate a set of
persons who We're to take the principal
Of the trust upon the death of the son,
Levi W. Houghton.
4, Where a testator has used technical
words or expressions he is presumed to
have used them in the sense that LAS
been ascribed to them by usage, and
sanctioned by judicial decisions, unless
a clear intention to use them in another
sense is apparent from the context
s. The term "heirs at law had we'll
recognized significance according to the
laws of this State at the time the testator
made his will. Jan. q. 1896, this court
having many years previous declared
that a widow was not an heir of her de-
ceased husband
L lie pidthllHY HONeFtft tHNOkeS the Ell
feet of the law of 1895, which established
a widows right by descent in the real
estate of her deceased husband. But
that law is not applicable in constituting
this will. for IL was not approved until
March 26, 1895, and did not take effect as
to presons then married till January first,
1897 Accordingly when the testator made
his will that law had not been enacted,
and at the time of his death, Dec. Ii,
1896 was not in force, except as to per-
sons married after May first. 1895.
The question here is, whether the words
heirs at law" used in the will OF Levi
w Heughton, which was made before
the law of 1895 was passed. and when,
according to usage and the judicial de-
cisions of this State, a widow was not
regarded as an heir at law of her hus-
band should be interpreted to include
the widow. There is nothing In the Ian
guage of the will Indicating that this
testator did not use the expression '"his
heirs at law according to its then rec
ogni2ed and defined import. and as not
including the widow of his son.
6. The court is. therefore, constrained
to the conclusion that the term "heirs at
law used by the testator in the fourth
item of his will to designate those who
We're to take the principal of the trust
property at the death of his son. Henry
W. must be interpreted as used with the
effect and meaning then ascrbed to it
under the laws of this State. and as ju-
dicially defined. with which he is presum-
ed to have been familiar.
Accordingly it is the opinion of the
court that the plaintiff. as the widow of
Henry w. Houghton, is not entitled TO
share in the property now held in trust
by the defendant under the provisions