Hubbard v. Hubbard

• Decision Date: 25 October 1902
• Citation: 64 N.E. 1038,198 Ill. 621
• Parties: HUBBARD v. HUBBARD.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

198 Ill. 621

64 N.E. 1038

HUBBARD

v.HUBBARD.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 25, 1902.

Appeal from appellate court, First district.

Bill for the construction of the will of George N. Hubbard, deceased. Decree of the appellate court (99 Ill. App. 555) construing the will in favor of Margaret Hubbard, and Estella J. Hubbard appeals. Affirmed.Henry O. Noyes, for appellant.

Wing & Chadbourne, for appellee.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the appellate court for the First district affirming a decree of the circuit court of Cook county construing the will of George N. Hubbard, deceased, which was in the following form when filed for probate:

‘Hoppertown, Mich., Jany 3d/1895.

‘In the name of God, amen,-I George N. Hubbard, being of sound and disposing mind and memory, calling to mind the frailty and uncertainties of human life, and being desirous of settling my worldly affairs and directing how my affairs shall be settled and divided and disposed of after my deceased while I have strength and capacity so to do make & publish this my last will and testatment hereby revoking and making null & void all other last wills and testaments by me heretofore made, as to my worldly estate and all the property real, personal or mixed of which I shall die seized & possessed or of which I shall be entitled at the time of my deceased I devise, bequeath and dispose thereof in the manner following, to-wit:

‘I give, devise & bequeathe to my beloved wife Estella Hubbard the 158-1/2 farm situated in Lee Township, Allegan Co. State of Michigan accordg to deed & Abstract of said property, also All Building on Same and all stock & implements & Personal property.

‘& I further bequeathe to my wife Estella Hubbard my Beneficiary Policy now held by me in the Hotel Men's Mutual Benefit Association of Chicag Ills.

‘And I further bequeathe to my Honored Mother Margaret Hubbard Eight Thousand Dollars in cash ($8000.) to be paid to her by my executors hereinafter named within 60 days after my decease The money now in my safety Box in the National Safety Co. Vaults Chicago Lastly I do nominate and appoint Monty Burke of Chicag Trustee of this will and John Waughup the Executor of this my last will & testament.

‘In testimony whereof I the said Geo. N. Hubbard Have to this my last will & Testament contaned on this sheet of paper subscriby my name an affix my seal this 3d day of Jany 1895.

‘Geo. N. Hubbard [Seal]

‘Witnesseth:

‘Mary E. Masters [Seal]

‘Jessie May Jennings [Seal]

‘I further bequeathe to my Sister Fannie M. McMillan the sum of $10-00/100 Ten Dollars in cash the money in my Safety Box in the National Safe Deposit Co. Vaults Chicago, Ills, within 60 days after my decease

‘I further Bequeathe to my Beloved Wife Estella Hubbard all money left in my Safety Box in the National Safety Deposit Co. Vaults, Chicago, Ill. After my funeral expenses & Just Debts are paid Within 60 Days Witnesseth) of my decease.

‘Geo. N. Hubbard [Seal]

‘Mary E. Masters [Seal]

‘Jessie May Jennings [Seal].’

The undisputed evidence is that the will and codicil were drawn by the testator himself while on his deathbed. He was then residing in the state of Michigan, on the farm referred to in the will. The will remained in his possession up to the time he drew the codicil, which was executed about three weeks after the execution of the will. Shortly thereafter the instrument was placed in an envelope and sealed by the testator, and by him delivered to his wife, appellant, with instructions to take the same at once to Chicago and deliver it to Martin W. Burke as its custodian, which instructions were carried out; and the envelope was never opened until at the meeting held in the office of the person named as executor, for the purpose of reading the will. It is not contended that any one other than the testator made the changes appearing on the face of the will. It appears that the will, at the time of its publication, contained the specific bequest of money to appellant which was afterwards crossed out by ink lines. The circuit court found that this provision was stricken out prior to the publication of the codicil, and that the will was in the above form at the time the codicil was executed.

HAND, J. (after stating the facts).

There are but two objections urged by appellant to the...