In the Goods of Anne Ashmore, Deceased
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 16 November 1843 |
| Date | 16 November 1843 |
| Court | Ecclesiastical Court |
English Reports Citation: 163 E.R. 892
IN THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS AT DOCTORS' COMMONS
S. C. 2 Notes of Cases, 465, 7 Jur. 1045. Discussed, Charlton v. Hindmarsh, 1859, 1 Sw. & Tr. 433.
in the goods of anne ashmore, Deceased. Prerogative Court, Nov. 16th, 1843. -A testatrix produced a codicil, all in her own handwriting, and with her signature made thereto, to two witnesses, present at the same time, who, at her request, made their marks thereto ; the testatrix wrote the names of the witnesses opposite their respective marks, and, by mistake, a wrong surname of one of them. Probate granted. [S. C. 2 Notes of Cases, 465, 1 Jur. 1045. Discussed, Charlton v. Hindmaish, 1859, 1 Sw. & Tr. 433.] Motion. Anae Ashtnore died on the 19th of August, 1843, aged eighty-six years, having made a will, which was duly executed and attested, and whereof she appointed two executors. On the 16th of June, 1843, the deceased, with her own hand, wrote a codicil, and took it into a room where two of her maidservants, Anne Cole and Elizabeth Sharpe, were employed about some household work. She requested them to make their marks to the paper, which they did, in her presence. Nothing was said on this occasion by the deceased as to her signature, or as to the paper [757] being of a testamentary nature, but one of the witnesses, Anne Cole, saw and recognised the signature of the deceased, made at the end of the last line of the paper. After the death of the testatrix this codicil was found, with the following Christian and surnames written opposite to or against the respective marks of the two witnesses -" The mark of Anne Cole " " The mark of Elizabeth Cummins." It appeared by the affidavits that a person named Elizabeth Cummins had, a short time previously to the day on which the codicil was executed, been on a visit to a servant of the deceased, but was living at some distance from the residence of the deceased on the day in question. The two attesting witnesses recollected all the circumstances attending the attestation of the codicil, and recognised their marks to it. R. Philhmore moved for probate of the will and codicil; he submitted...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Duppa, Executor of Baskerville v Mayo
...v. Wakeford; which in this respect appear to overrule Lemayne v. Stanley, 3 Lev. 1. S. C, 1 Freem. 538. So a man may attest by mark; 3 Curt. 756; though not by sealing, semble. 3 Curt. 117, In re Byrd. So a man may well attest, who, not knowing how to write, has his hand guided by another. ......
-
Charlton v Hindmarsh
...out as visible upon the document. The mark of a witness is sufficient, though another person writes his name. (In the goods of Ashrnoie, 3 Curt. 756.) If a witness puts a mark, though he can write, it is a good subscription. (In the good* of Amiss, 2 Rob. 116.) So also if he puta his initia......
-
Leech and Others against Bates
... ... in the will ag.unst John B., one of the children of the said deceased, whose interest in the residue of the testator's property was considerably ... ...
-
Bell v Hughes
...In the Goods of White 2 No. Cas. 461. In the Goods of Kileher 6 No. Cas. 15. Harrison v. Elvin 3 Q. B. 117. In the Goods of AshmoreENR 3 Curt. 756. In the Goods of Amiss 2 Rob. 116. Playne v. Scriven 1 Rob. 772. In the Goods of Elizabeth Trevanion 2 Rob. 311. In the Goods of Hannah Cope 2 R......