Prerogative Court, Monday...
i nsl was aquestlon upon the admission of an allepation, nropound. ing certain facts, and an unfinished paper connected with the last testamentary dispositions of the late Thomas Howard Griffilths, Esq., agentl eman of large West Indian property, who perished on te 23d of June, 1823, it) ahorrible domestic catastrophe, to which, as all allusion on this occasion was studiously forborne bv counsel, we shall not now more particularly recur; and of whichl the melan_ chloly particulars must be too fresh in the recollection of our readers to render it necessary that we should do so. (They were related in Tlte Times of the 24th of June, 1823.) 'te party proponent was INIrs. Lucy C. Griffiths, the widow of this gentleman * and the suit was brought against his daughter, Alrs. Jane Lane, the wife of .1. Bradford Laane, Esq. We collected from the argument, that soinc time in 1809, the deceased quitted England for Barbadoes, takin with him his dauglhter, Jane Griffliths (the party in tHis cause, an married in 1811 to a Mr. Lane of that island), and William Grif- fiths, one of his sons. Three other sons, Cnarles, Thomas, and Daniel, were at this time in the naval and military services, and Abel was at school in England. i.lr. Griffliths appears to have been at no timne in the history to which this cause refers in very affection. ate intercourse with his family; for MIr. Clharles Griffiths, arriving at Barbadoes in the latter end of 1809, was sent by him to manage his estate in Demerara, where he continued till 1811; wher, they quarrelled, and Charles was removed from his situation. In the commencement of August, 1821, the deceased having made his will, whereby he appointed his son Thomas Griffliths his sole executor and residuary legatee, after devising a few legacies to his wife and certain individuals therein named, left Barbadoes and came to England. In the surnmmer or autumn of 1822, dur- ing his residence in the vicinity of Southamnpton the deceased quar- relled with his son Thomas Griffliths; and compiained to some of his friends of his son's conduct and nanner towards him. After a dura- tien of a few months, this quarrel was appeased. At the latter end of the same year, in consequence of the embarrassment into which Il\r. Lane's affairs had fallen, MfrIs. Lane and herfamily, to whosehouse in London Mtr. Griffiths had removed, went over to join Alr. Lane in Paris; and there they continued to reside until the death of the testator. The testator often declared, after their departure, that hie would make a will in favour of this lady and her children * and the paper upon wlhicl he was employed when the quarrel that had long subsisted between hini and her son Abel terminated in so fatal a manner, was that now propounded on behalf of Mlrs. Lane, in whose favour it appeared to be. The deceased was long before tbis period separated from his wife, and on bad terms with other members of his DBr. LusurXGTrON (WhtO appeared for MIrs. Lane) deseribed th;s to be an allegtation propounding the asserted la. t WilL ande estament. of Thomae howard Griffiths, deceased.The Court woutdtemember, that on a former occavionr tbs aUegatigcs was of 'ered in support ofa certain uhtfniitied testanientaty paper in the handwriting of thede. ceased himself, and which, it was allesed, he wFaS '-prevehtedZby*-s sudden and violent death-fromn complstlng. The Court .Wus tlen,-Qf opinion, that certain other facts, tending to confirfrihe 6gbte'ia1 statements of theallegatloxi shoild be pleaded; aphest' haviigi been so pleaded. the learheli counsel trusted the C'urt WQuld no, think the allegation 4dmiissible. Dr.J-NFNl E(on bbhalfoftthe widow) also reminded the Courf, tbat it had formerly considered this allegation as unflt to be-admitted to proof, bn acct-unt of some essential facts npt beings.fficiend'kpIled. Even In its present state thefacis-appearedto him (Dr. Jejpner) tobe vety loosely pleaded, and to be supported by declatationsof as lotse a description. On the previqus occasion tbis allegation consisted of 14 articles: in its reformed state, As now offered by his leamed friends, it was comprised in no less than one and twenty. The quee. tion for the Coui was, whether the facts specified, coupled with the declatations pleadeed in iheir support. were such as shoultd entitle this allegation to proof? and whether, if the allegations should be all proved, the patter now propounded ought to be pronounced for as the last will and testament of the deceased ? That paper in ittself was singularly inefficacious and incomplete ' it was without date,without signatue, wlthout c5;ecutors appointed, though they were frequent. Iy indeed alluded to in the body of such paper, with respect to cer- tain acts by thenm to he nerfored in reference to his landed estate at Barbadoes, and the legatees under it vere designated by the ini. tial letters of their names, instead of by their names. Various al- terations, moeover, seemedi to have been made in it at different times. This paper, in short, was incomplete both in fact anti in substance; and where the effect of such a paper was to revoke a former regularly executed will, tlhe Court would require very full and satisfactory proof that it contained the expressed final intenlis of the deceased, clearly and deliberately determined on at the time suchrpaperwaswrtten. Unless this could beshown,it would not be sufficient for the learned cotuisel on the other side to contend that the deceased was engaged upon such a paper at the very tine he was snatchel away by a premature death ; because the ques. tion here must be-Did it contain the fixed and ultimate determina. tion of thc deceased at that time with respect to the disposition of his propertv, every presumption of that sort being with the formal will of 1821 ? The seconil article pleaded that the deceased, at hi6 dealh, left behind him two daughtern and five sons; one of which sons was sa- Ito have tied at or about tltesame time that the de. ceased testator expiredl. From the pectiliar nature of the circum; stances, it could not be ascertained whichi of them died first. The thirdl article pleaded, that deceased in 1809. left England and went to reside at Barbadoes, takinig with hibn one of his sons, MIr. IV. Griffitirs. Now, it did not appear how thie facts set forth in these articles could aft'ect the question of any alteration in the dis- positions of hi. will of A ugust, 1821; and therefore they did notseem very relevant to the isfsue ir, this cause.The fourth article pleaded tis affection for his daughter, AIrrs. Lane, and his declarations of in- tended testamentary boiunty in hier favour. The Stb article alleged the arrival of 3Ir. Charles Griffiths in Barbadoes, his einmploy. meat in ile superintendence of his fatier's Demerara property, and tlle quarrel between themi in 1811. But what coLtld these facts have to do with any question between tite paper propountded, anid the will of' August, 1821 tIn that will of 1821, the deceased had remenm. bered MrT. Charles Griffiths, anld it seemed quite unnecessary to plead any antecedent matters tending to show that there had exisied between hiim and his fiather any disagreements. Tite next article set forthi, that just before the deceased's departure from Barbadoes, le became offended with-M11rs. Lane in consequence of sotne observa- tions that had 'fallen fromi lier, antl therefore made the vwill of Au. gust, 1821; whereby lie appointed Thomas Griffiths, his son, to be ltis sole executor. Now it was dlifficult to imagine that that will could have been made by the deceased-under any circumstances of displeasure (as on his part) with Mrs. Lane, seeingthat hecontinued to reside with her in the greatest harmony-came over to England at the same time-resided'with her in London-always (as it was pleaded) expresseil this afrection and these Intentions towards her, and was on the point 9f going to France to brinig tier back to Eng. land, when lie (-ied. The 7th article pleaded the deceased's quarrel with Thomas Griffitlis, his son, and his remarks upon his conduct, and hils quarrel witlh his son Abel, and that from- August, 1822, to the time of his death, the deceaised continied at variance withi, and was never reconciled to, Abel Griffiths. The 8th article, after statiig the reconciliation which took place between the deceased and hil daughter, .Mrs. Lane, pleaded, that prior to liis will of 1821, lie had disagreed with his wife. But how was this shown? For it appeared by that will of August, 1821, that heprovided for an atinuity to Airs. riffitis, of 3001. per annum in bar of dower. 'the article pleading a leacy of 5001. to his nastural daughter was as little to the pur- pose of this cause. The learned Counsel then objected to the irrele; vancy, as to the eftect of any proof which could be brought, of de- ceased's declarations on1 the 8th of June preceding his death, to MIrs. Skreen, ' that lie was a sad lazy fellow that he had not made his will;" anti subsequently, "tilat, he had been writing at his will ;" and finally, he contended that the allegation was not entitled to go to proof Dr. PHILLIMoRtV, on the same side observed, that the paper propountded contained erasures, blanks, designations of persons by initial letters only] and no specification of eXceUtors or trustees. Dr. I,usritr?GToi and Dr. Donsos were heard itl support of the allegation. Sir J. NtcItoLL said, that though it was passible this paper might be taken as a testamentary instrument conjointly with the formal will, it would be by no means considered as a revocatory pa- per. Under the circumstances, however, the Court would admit the allegation, to enable the parties to go to proof, though it had no im- pression that they could do so with e seect. (The landed estate in the WVest Indies is of very considerable PREROGATIVE COURT- Mmnm-,v T.-, c GI(IFFITHS, ATTORNEY OF GRIPFITIIS. A.rtAT%I 7 {vr