Shanghai, 24th Sept, Before D. H. Baey, Esq, Consul-General, sitting as Judge.
In the matter of the Estate of Epw1s Maurice Application for the Probate of the Will.
'V. Druanioxp appeared for the F. B. Forbes and F. D. itch, who bold a Power of Attorney for the heirs and beneficiaries under the will.
Mr, R, E, Wansewntcur appeared for Mr. J. P. Bisset, one of the executors and trustees named in the will, Mr. J. J, Hexpersow appeared for the next of kin aad heirs-at-law of the deceased, Thig matter was before the Court on the 17th inst, Mr. Drummond, on behalf of srs, F. B, Forbes and F. D, Hitch, attorand b residing in the United States, had filed a petition for the abate of the will and for the issuance of tte thereon, and for 6 petition Mr. tions, a copy of which had not been the petitioners at the last hearing, and in jwenoe issue had not been joined. Fur this to be done an adjournment was decided upon until to-day; whereas at the same time M Wainewright applied for further proce: in the matter to be postponed until such time as ho received instructions from his client, Mr. J. P. Bisset, in England, The Coonr now explained that two motion: had been filed—one for a commission to tak beyond th other, file Mr. Wainewright, for Mr.
ing for an adjournment of all further ings until the 13th November.
It was admitted by the different parties that copies of these motions had been served on them, Ta support of the motion by Mr. Warxz-HMw, the following affidavit bad also been led "James Buchanan, of Shanghai, in the Empire of China, Share Broker and Laud Agent, being duly' sworn, says 1—That he i trio Bi named in and appointed by th ioned Will of the above-nam Smith, deceased, and th conjunction with Robert Ernest Waivewright, hho. attorney aiid counsel of the #aid John islet, and subject to the direction and instructions of the said John Petrie His aot, he has the management and control in Shanghai of the transactions of the said John Petrie Bisset, in relation to the estate and affairs of the said deceased.
—That on the twelfth day of August Just, being the day next following the delivery of the judgment and opinion of this Honorable Court in the matter of the petition of th th admitted to ry might hereon to him the said John Petri sent to the suid John Petrie Bisset by telegraph a message apprising him of the effect of th judgment and opinion, and on the me day sent or caused to be sent to him by post a printed report of the said judgment and opinion.
"3.—That on the third day of September natant he, this deponent, sent or caused to be sent by telegraph to the said John Pet the following message, namely, "F. B. Forbes (of Russell & Ca.)' has applied for letters of administration read as follows by A. B. ©. Code—shall we oppose; sond instructions forthwith"—to which said message ho, this deponent, received on the eighth day of September instant the following mastage in reply, unmely: "Delay hearing pending further particular "4—That in obedience to the direction contained in the said last-mentioned massage, filed Honorable Court a motion that hho, this deponent, has this day caused to be
the ation of the above-mentioned petition of the said Francis Blackwell Forbes and Frederic Delauo Hitch may stand over and they bad been informed by Ar. Biseot of certain objections and difficulties that appeared on the face of They had aleo been informed, he understood, by a gal adviser that the will was not good, that it would be pronounced void and nugatory, and mentioned petition. they had decided to wait before they took—That as this deponent is informed and affirmative and positive stops in the matter, ily bel i Bisset is That was an explanation from one of the parties in communication with and is acting in ce: ventured to give on his own ort with such of the legatees under the nid ty. With regard to the position he will of the said Edwin Maurice Smith, himself had taken up, he urged that he was deceased, as are resident in Europe, and that not trying to upset anything; he was merel it is of importance in the interest of such objecting to the probate of a will whic legatees that opportunity should be afforded showed itself to be void and nugatory. Ho before any further steps in this matter are was there as objector to those who wished to taken, for their views and wishes to be made establish the will, and did not ask anyth known to the representatives of the said John but that the petition be Petrie Bisset in Shanghai. and that taken Hexpersox inquired whether there taken if the at all, riy further pleadings filed on behalf of duty of the wi petitioners to establish! by contesting the objections he had filed.
Druanioxn replied in the negative.
The Covrt—Do you ask for the matter to Couxr said the petition, the cros: be considered now petition or answer, and the two motions were Mr, Hexpersoy replied that the only pleadings on the file, ask for anything beyond the consider:
Mr. Davxatoxp presumed then that they his objections against the will being admitted exactly in the same position as they to probate, but ho understood the issue was were last week except that a motion had bee filed for the adjournment then asked for, and now made up. Ho objected to the estal ment of the will, hich, he said, must be that it was supported by an affidavit by Mr.
Buchanan. declared null and' void, cit was positively illegal and altogether nugatory.
The Covne replied that in reality so far as Mr. Dvataosp deemed it advisable to make the petition was concerned the pleadings had not changed, 1 few observations in support of the prayer to Mr. Hexpersox contended that the obthe petition he had filed, lections he had filed to the petition settled an Mr, Hexpensox objected to any observa. issue and that the petitioners could demur. If tions of this kind at the present time, He they did not demur, then, he maintained, had other business to attend to and did not the objections would' stand good for hearing. wish to listen to Te was true demurrers hnd been allowed, but The Cover q there was nothing in the rules regulating the sidered was Mr, Wainewright's motion for an procedure of the Court for anything but adjournment. petitions and answers. In this matter an Mr. Droastoxp said he had filed a petition issue had be by the petition and in the Court and had come twice to support and it, and he now wished to make a few observa-tious on the objections filed by Mr, Hender-sou against the petition, and algo on Mr. petitioners asked for simple thi Wainewright's motion, and he wished to do namely that the will should #0 without interruption probate, and ho, in his objection Mr, HexpEnsox lind no objection to Mr, will was invalid and not entitled to be ad-Drummond dealing with the objection mitted to probate, That was the issue to be then a determine: ith, pointing out that no regarded the petition and The Courr thought the question of ment was the qu any docu-fiat, mont at all Mr. Wainwright had tiled " motion for the proceedings to be stayed un!
(Mr, Wainewright') certain date the pres and solely in support of the petition which he ut, Bir. Biss was entitled to had led; and with regard to that petition Court I he might' state in th first place that it was reait Court of sation for filed simply and solely consequence it of California, of, the judgment, by his Honour declaring isser's inability legally to act as execu-certain time fixed by law for in accordance with the wishes of the testator. Had the judgment been other wi Mr. Warsewatout pointed out that Mr. declaring that Mr. Bisset was elegiblo to act, Bisset was not only interested as one of the the petitioners would have been perfectly executors named in the will, but he had also. beneficial interest und willing to acquiesce, and they would have el to the eat ed without the sity of discussing it, as it was obviously fair that all parties having a beneficial interest under the will should have notice of Mr. actions and it aside in order that they opportunity of appearing, or being represented in the Court, when the question of the validity of the will was argued. Though he only resented Mr. Lo would ask the Court, interests of all the parties concerned, to order that they should receive notice The Cour proposed to give notice by publication and by citations by the next to the usual place of residence of parties. Tt was somewhat singular, he said, that the beneficiaries living in Europe had not yet come forward. In the proceedings that had been going on it had not been absolutely necessary for them to come forward, but now the validity of the will was attacked, which went to the root of everything, it was necessary that they should be notified.
Mr. Hespersox replied that the bene ficiaries living in Europe had communicated of taking some action; and in their
to do, they filed the petition they did, He to shat was right and proper for them than explained what ho conceived to be the position of affairs, presuming that the Court would adopt one of three courses, grant the prayer of the petition, dismiss it, or adjourn the hearing. Ho then reviewed the objections filed by Mr. Henderson (whioh have already been published in our columns) seriatim, contending that the first three volved gololy legal questions and no evidence was required, and it would be for the Court to determine whether they were sufficient to justify the will being upset, As to the fourth objection, namely:—"*That the true, lawful, and proper name of the person called Edwin Maurice Smith in the petition, and who died at Shanghai on or about 19th day of November, 1878, as alleged therein, was Edwin Maurice Pitcher, and that the name "Edvwin Maurice Smith," by which the deceased was latterly known, was a false and fictitious name, which the deceased had uulawfally assumed, and that as appeared upon the face thereof the said alleged will was executed, if at all, by the deceased, under and in such unlawful false and fictitious name," evidence might be refired, but assuming the fact to be admitted Smith was not the te
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.