Year: 1873

Whoever will go into well-furnished Law
Library, not generally understood to contain
interesting reading to those who do not carry
a bag of green, will fnd'long rsws of volumes
the contents of which are Ae most mean-
choly evidence OF the immense gap which
yagns and stretches between the dead anu
the living. These are the books containing
tho history of litigation concerning wills.
Succinct notices of actions thus arising are
freouent in the intelligence of the daily news
papers. The first impression of the sensitive
man in perusing these Is that of the melan-
choly impotence of our kind. Whlle we
live. in respect of this vile dross which
We call wealth, we may have our
own way. We must be exceedingly feeble and
non-witted before the law will take from us
the disposition of our dollars and centsj but
when we are once well in our collins, with
tho prayers said over us end the sod neatly
fixed above u.s. we become almost as nobody,
and immense liberties are taken with our repu-
tation for sanity. 1t is wonderful how dead
man is supposed not to have known his own
mind while breathing. 1t is curious, this nice
investigation whether mind was sound and
"disposing" or not. It disturbs the solemnty
of DEATH 1t tampers with sacred memories.
1t makes laugh and a jest of regrets. Con-
sanguinity is nothing. Pleasant relations long
maintained are nothing. Men and women
consent to be like the ghouls and the hyenas.
And after all, there is the poor dead person
in tho coffin and under the sod!


A case Just heard before the Surrogate in
this county affords sufficient text for what
we have to say upon this subject. Mrs. Croes,
an old lady, for many years an invalid con-
fined to her own house, having some $4,000
to give away, made her daughter Anna the
legatee sole Of her estate. Now, il this old
gentlewOman had died intestate, OF if she had
made something like an equal distribution
among her heirs, there would have been not
the slightest doubt Of her "sound and dis
"posing mind" She pleased to give her
money to her daughter Anna, to one who had
been kind to her, to one who had served her
faithfully and constantly for many years. to
one who had borne with her infirmities and
ministered to her necessities, to. one who had
cOmprehended her weakness and been tender
of her whims. That she did this is held, by
those who would set aside her will, to be
proof of an unsound mind. Morally c0nsd-
cred, wo should regard the evidence in
such case as this az going TO show that
Mrs. Crocs was in the very soundest frame of
mind. TO whom should her money go except
to one who had been kind to heri TO whom
should she leave it save to one who had been
loved by her out of oil her children2 Why
should she be considered as mad because she
was grateful and coDsiderato and thankfulY
Why should the law interpose, md say TO this
poor old invalid lady, "You shall not do as
:" you please with your ownfn Here was
young woman (as the Surrogate justly OBJ
served) who had "devOted her life 10 her
"mothcr." She had given up opportunities of
marriage. She had banished herself from the
society which the young usually love. She
had been nurse and comforter and consoler.
Why should mother refrain from giving to
one who had thus been all in all to her tho
money which would make her circumstances
easy when the mother was gonof


We claim tho right of person OF dis
"posing mind to dispose. 1t is discreditablo
that thcfe should bo this constant interference