Crerar v. Williams
Citation | 34 N.E. 467,145 Ill. 625 |
Parties | CRERAR et al. v. WILLIAMS et al. |
Decision Date | 19 June 1893 |
Court | Supreme Court of Illinois |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from appellate court, first district.
Bill by Donald Crerar, Peter Crerar, Mary Crerar, Catherine Cramb, Elizabeth McGregor, Duncan Stewart, Alexander Stewart, Peter Stewart, Margaret Crerar, Elizabeth Menzies, Catherine Forsythe, and Elizabeth McIntosh against Norman Williams and Huntington W. Jackson, individually, and as executors of, and trustees under, the last will of John Crerar, deceased, the trustees of the Second Presbyterian Church of Chicago, the Second Presbyterian Church of Chicago, and the Chicago Literary Club, to have certain bequests in said will declared void. The bill was dismissed on demurrer, and the appellate court affirmed the decree. Complainants appeal. Affirmed.
F. A. Stirtan, (A. W. Browne, A. B. Jenks, and W. A. Cunnea, of counsel,) for appellants.
James L. High, Williams, Holt & Wheeler, and Lyman & Jackson, (John H. Mulkey, of counsel,) for appellees.
This was a bill in chancery, by appellants against appellees, praying that certain clauses in the last will of John Crerar, deceased, be declared void, and the bequests therein named decreed to them, as heirs at law. The circuit court of Cook county sustained a general demurrer to the bill, and entered a decree dismissing it at the costs of the complainants. This is an appeal from the judgment of the appellate court, affirming that decree. 44 Ill. App. 497.
A copy of the will, consisting of 52 paragraphs or clauses, was filed with, and made a part of, the bill. The validity of the instrument as a whole is not questioned, but eight of the bequests therein named are alleged to be void for the reason that the language used by the testator is insufficient, in law, to make valid testamentary gifts. Those bequests are as follows:
The first four clauses of the will (more particularly the fourth) are pertinent to the questions raised in argument, and they are as follows:
The first ground of reversal is that the circuit court erred in not overruling the demurrer to the bill, that the complainants might prove the laws of the states of New York, Iowa, and Texas applicable to the construction of said will, it being alleged in the bill that the testator died seised of real estate situated in those states. Waiving all other answers to this point, it is sufficient to say the bill fails to allege what the laws of those states are in that regard, and they were not, therefore, the subject of proof. The demurrer admitted all facts well pleaded, but nothing more. It will scarcely be contended that a demurrerto a pleading should be overruled in order to allow a party to make proof of facts not alleged therein. The first point is clearly untenable.
It is not denied that there is an attempt, by the provisions of the fiftieth clause of the will, to make a general residuary bequest of all the testator's estate....
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Richards v. Wilson
...Codman v. Brigham, supra; Franklin v. Hastings, supra; Brigham v. Peter Bent Brigham Hospital, supra; Dykeman v. Jenkines, supra; Crerar v. Williams, supra; Hubbard v. Worcester Art Museum (1907), Mass. 280, 80 N.E. 490; Russell v. Allen, supra; Maxcy v. City of Oshkosh (1910), 144 Wis. 238......
-
Lackland v. Walker
... ... Charity, 162 Pa. St. 239; Ould v. Washington ... Hospital, etc., 95 U.S. 312; Jones v ... Habersham, 107 U.S. 175; Curar v. Williams, 145 ... Ill. 625; Hicks v. Hobson, 6 L. R. A. 157; ... Att'y-Gen. v. South Sea Co., 4 Bevan, 458; ... Att'y-Gen. v. Wilson, 3 Mylne & Keen, ... Odell (1865) 10 Allen 1, 16; Brown v ... Baptist Society (1869) 9 R.I. 177; Weeks v ... Hobson (1890) 150 Mass. 377, 23 N.E. 215; Crerar v ... Williams (1893) 145 Ill. 625, 652, 34 N.E. 467; In ... re Mercer Home (1894) 162 Pa. 232, 238, 239, 29 A. 731; ... 2 Perry, Trusts (4 ... ...
-
Provena Covenant Med. v. Dept. of Revenue
...gift" (emphasis added). The phrase comes ultimately from a Massachusetts case, which the supreme court first quoted in Crerar v. Williams, 145 Ill. 625, 34 N.E. 467 (1893), as "A comprehensive legal definition of a charity, or charitable use, is given by Gray, J., in Jackson v. Phillips, 14......
-
Hardy v. Davis
...Bank of Chicago v. Elliott, 406 Ill. 44, 92 N.E.2d 66; Skinner v. Northern Trust Co., 288 Ill. 229, 123 N.E. 289; Crerar v. Williams, 145 Ill. 625, 34 N.E. 467, 21 L.R.A. 454). Moreover, gifts to charity are looked upon with favor by the courts (Village of Hinsdale v. Chicago City Missionar......