 The inauspicious beginnings of Judith 's marriage , in spite of her husband and his family being otherwise unexceptionable , has led to speculation that this was the cause for William Shakespeare 's hastily altered last will and testament . He first summoned his lawyer , Francis Collins , in January 1616 . On 25 March he made further alterations , probably because he was dying and because of his concerns about Quiney . In the first bequest of the will there had been a provision " vnto my sonne in L [ aw ] " ; but " sonne in L [ aw ] " was then struck out , with Judith 's name inserted in its stead . To this daughter he bequeathed £ 100 " in discharge of her marriage porcion " ; another £ 50 if she were to relinquish the Chapel Lane cottage ; and , if she or any of her children were still alive at the end of three years following the date of the will , a further £ 150 , of which she was to receive the interest but not the principal . This money was explicitly denied to Thomas Quiney unless he were to bestow on Judith lands of equal value . In a separate bequest , Judith was given " my broad silver gilt bole " . 
 The inauspicious beginnings of Judith <a href='null_genetive' title='1'><mark>'s</mark></a>marriage , in spite of her husband and his family being otherwise unexceptionable , <a href='been_done' title='2'><mark>has</mark></a> led to speculation that this was the cause for William Shakespeare <a href='null_genetive' title='3'><mark>'s</mark></a>hastily altered last will and testament . He first summoned his lawyer , Francis Collins , in January 1616 . On 25 March he made further alterations , probably because he was dying and because of his concerns about Quiney . In the first bequest of the will <a href='dey_it' title='4'><mark>there</mark></a> had been a provision " vnto my sonne in L [ aw ] " ; but " sonne in L [ aw ] " was then struck out , with Judith <a href='null_genetive' title='5'><mark>'s</mark></a>name inserted in its stead . To this daughter he bequeathed £ 100 " in discharge of her marriage porcion " ; another £ 50 if she <a href='uninflect' title='6'><mark>were</mark></a> to relinquish the Chapel Lane cottage ; and , if she or any of her children <a href='uninflect' title='7'><mark>were</mark></a> still alive at the end of three years following the date of the will , a further £ 150 , of which she was to receive the interest but not the principal . This money was explicitly denied to Thomas Quiney unless he <a href='uninflect' title='8'><mark>were</mark></a> to bestow on Judith lands of equal value . In a separate bequest , Judith was given " my broad silver gilt bole " . 
The inauspicious beginnings of Judith  marriage , in spite of her husband and his family bein otherwise unexceptionable , done led to speculation that dis was da cause for William Shakespeare  hastily altered last will and testament . He first summoned his lawyer , Francis Collins , in January 1616 . On 25 March he made further alterations , probly cause he was dying and bebecuzf his concerns about Quiney . In tdafirst bequest of the gon it had been a provision " vnto my sonne in L [ aw ] " ; but " sonne in L [ aw ] " was then struck out , witt Judith  name inserted in its stead . To this daughter he bequeathed £ 100 " in discharge of her marriage porcion " ; another £ 50 if she was to relinquish the Chapel Lane cottage ; and , if she or any of her children was still alive at thdand of three years following the date of thedall , a further £ 150 , of which she was to receive the interest but not the principal . This money was explicitly denied to Thomas Quiney unless he was to bestow on Judith lands of equal value . In a separate bequest , Judith was given " mah broad silver gilt bole " .