New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-12-28
B0STW|CK WILL. UPSET
Five Children, Who Were Un-
mentioned, Now Get Millions.
FOUR BORN AFTER ITS DATE
Fortune Will Now Be Divided
as Though Millionaire Had
Died Intestate.

The litigation affecting the will of Albert
c. Bostwlck. the millionaire and former
commodore Of the Larchmont Yacht Club,
who died on November TO- 1911. was
brought to a conclusion yesterday by Sur
rogate Willard. of Westchester County
who held that the will was void as to the
four children OF Mr.. Bostwick who we're
born after it was made. BY the Surro-
gates ruling. these four children viii
share in the millions from the estate
though they were originally cut of by
the will This decision by the Surrogate
upholds the contention made before him
by the special guardian Of the children.
Bostwick's will was drawn on June 3,
1899, and left all his property, OF every
kind and description, to Marie >. Bost-
wick, his wife. absolutely.
At the time OF his death. Bostwick was
survived by his wife and FIVE children.
namely, Dorothy s. Bostwick, born March
&C. 1899; Albert G.. Bostwick. ir.. Lillian
S. Bostwick, Dunbar W. Bostw ," and
George II. Bostwick. the four last named
being born after the making of the Will
In reviewing the case. Surrogate Mil
lard finds that the special guardian. while
not Directing to the probate OF the VIII.
claimed that the four after-born children
are entitled TO the same right in the
estate of Albert &. Bostwick that they
would have had II no will had been made.
lie bases this claim on Section 26 of the
decedent estate law.
The Surrogate states that II is con-
coded by all parties that no mention is
made of the four after-born children in
the will. and the only question raised is
whether or not there was a settlement
otherwise made which would satisfy the
provisions OF the statute.
The Surrogate finds that Jabez a. Bost-
wick. father Of Albert G. Bostwick and
husband Of Helen G. Bostwick. made
last will and testament. which was duly
admitted To probate by the Surrogate OF
the County Of New York. wherein IL was
provided that third Of the resduary
estate was directed TO be- paid over 10
the Farmers Loan and Trust Conpa ny.
TO be held by 1t In trust for the life Of
Helen G. Bostwick. mother OF Albert c.
Bostwick. and during her lifetime the In
come arising thercfrom was TO be paid
10 her, and upon the further trust for tho
life OF Albert G. Bos,wick: and upon the
death OF both OF them the principal sum
10 he paid over 10 tho issue Of Albert g.
Bostwick. The Surrogate states that the
said will was IN existence and known 20
the testator on June s. 1909. the time OF
making his last will and testament.
BY the terms OF Jabez A Bostwick's
will. says Surrogate Willard. n large sum
OF money was provided for the children
OF Albert G. Bostwick. which. the pro-
ponents attorney urged. amply provided
for them. and should he taken into con-
sideratlon I'm deciding the case. The Sur
rogate says. however. tina, he does not
feel that that has anything 10 do with
the question.
In summing up his decision Surrogate
Willard refers 20 the cases OF Udell versus
Storms. rs A. u. lei. and McCrum versus
McCrum. III \. D.. 50. rs UNFOLDING his
finding
The Surrogate then directs that each
OF the Bostwiok after-born children is
entitled TO an undivided one-flfth OF the
real estate OF Albert g. BostwIck. sub
jet to the dover or his wife. and to two
nfteenths OF the personal estate.
The proceedings to break the will we're
started in December. 1911. The special
guardian appointed by the Surrogate OBJ
jected to the Will, claiming that because
OF the fact that the children born after
the will was made were not mentioned
in or provided for in the instrument they
were entitled to the same share OF the
estate as though Bostwlck had died In
testate. Mrs. Marie s. Bostwick con-
tended that Jabez 4 Bostwick had amply
provided FOR these children In his will
and that therefore her husbands will
leaving everything to her should stand.