Powell v. Hatch

Citation100 Mo. 592,14 S.W. 49
PartiesPOWELL v. HATCH et al.
Decision Date02 June 1890
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri

Appeal from circuit court, Jackson county; J. H. SLOVER, Judge.

The facts necessary to an understanding of this case can perhaps be most satisfactorily exhibited by setting out in full the petition and answer, as the case is substantially an agreed one, as will be seen. Petition. "Plaintiff says he is the executor of the last will and testament of Lydia A. Gillett, deceased, and also legatee and trustee under said will. That he has duly qualified as such executor. That the will was duly probated in Jackson county, Mo., the domicile of said testatrix. That said will is in words and figures as follows: `I, Lydia A. Gillett, of Kansas City, Missouri, being of sound mind, do make, publish, and declare this to be my last will and testament, in manner following: First. After the payment of my funeral expenses, I give and bequeath unto Hiram F. Hatch, of Cleveland, Ohio, the sum of five hundred ($500) dollars. Second. I give and bequeath unto George H. Canfield, of St. Lawrence county, Montana territory, the sum of two hundred ($200) dollars. Third. My executor or administrator shall erect over my grave a monument of the value of one hundred ($100) dollars. Fourth. I give and bequeath unto Mary Wooster, of Kansas City, the sum of two hundred ($200) dollars. Fifth. I give and devise unto Cuthbert Powell the sum of five hundred ($500) dollars, and I also give, devise, and bequeath unto the said Powell, in trust, however, the remainder of my estate — First, to expend the sum of two thousand ($2,000) dollars in the erection of a church for the Emanuel Baptist Church of Kansas City; second, to pay the sum of one hundred ($100) dollars to Charles Manhartz, and the sum of one hundred ($100) dollars to H. A. Hawkins and the rest, if there be any, to such charitable purposes as my said trustee may deem best. I hereby nominate and appoint Cuthbert Powell the executor of this, my last will and testament.' The said estate consisted of personal property, which has been sold for five hundred ($500) dollars, and a note which is in dispute; and also the following land in Jackson county, Mo., to-wit: [Here follows description.] That said real estate is incumbered by a deed of trust for three thousand ($3,000) dollars to secure a note of the testatrix; said note bearing interest at the rate of nine (9) per cent. per annum. That the legacies aforesaid amount to thirty-seven hundred ($3,700) dollars. That it was supposed at the time the will was executed that the debts, the expenses connected with the administration, and the legacies specified, would consume nearly the whole of said estate. But plaintiff says on account of the rise of value of the real estate belonging to said estate there will be a surplus of from three thousand to five thousand ($5,000) dollars. Plaintiff says that said testatrix died March 6, 1886, without revoking said will, leaving as her only heir Hiram F. Hatch, a citizen and resident of the state of Ohio. Plaintiff says he has added as parties the unknown heirs of said Lydia A. Gillett out of abundance of caution, although he believes there are none; that he has obtained an order of the probate court of said county for sale of sufficient of said real estate to satisfy all the debts of the estate to pay the said legacies, as well as all costs connected with the administration. Plaintiff says further that in pursuance of the trust in him by said will reposed he has selected and designated the `Woman's Refuge and Maternity Hospital' and the `Home for the Friendless Boys' as...

To continue reading

Request your trial
21 cases
  • St. Louis Union Trust Co. v. Little
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 30, 1928
    ...poor homeless children" is a valid bequest for charitable purposes. Chambers v. St. Louis, 29 Mo. 543; Howe v. Wilson, 91 Mo. 45; Powell v. Hatch, 100 Mo. 592; Barkley v. Donnelly, 112 Mo. 561. (3) A clause in a will should not be declared void for uncertainty merely because it is capable o......
  • Gossett v. Swinney
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • December 19, 1931
    ...within that class of charities where the courts can and will direct the trustee to carry out the will of the testator." In Powell v. Hatch, 100 Mo. 592, 14 S. W. 49, a will devising a fund to a trustee to be devoted "to such charitable purposes as my said trustee may deem best," was In Sapp......
  • Boyd v. Frost Nat. Bank
    • United States
    • Texas Supreme Court
    • July 10, 1946
    ...stated that the decision was based upon a statute passed in Wisconsin in 1917 which changed the rule in that state. Powell v. Hatch, 100 Mo. 592, 14 S.W. 49. 43 Elizabeth is a part of the common law of Missouri. However, in that state it is held in Hadlee v. Forsee, 203 Mo. 418, 101 S.W. 59......
  • Lackland v. Walker
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 30, 1899
    ... ... 126; Schmidt v. Hess, 60 ... Mo. 591; First Baptist Church v. Robberson, 71 Mo ... 326; Howe v. Wilson, 91 Mo. 47; Powell v. Hatch, 100 ... Mo. 592; Mo. Hist. Soc. v. Academy of Science, 94 ... Mo. 459; Barkley v. Donnelly, 112 Mo. 561. (2) The ... will of Mr ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT