| OCR Text |
Show ADDS ONE MORE DIVORCE QUIRK Decision Made by Referee May Be Good Law, But The dowager duchess of Manchester Manches-ter loft her residuary estate to liCr son, t ho presei.t duke, and bis wife $1,050,000 in trust with an annual Income of ?lSo,000. When the will was signed the wife of the duke was the former Helena Ziinniorinnnn, daughter of a Cincinnati millionaire. Now a referee appointed by n Supreme Su-preme court justice in Manhattan decides that the present duchess the beneficiary, the former Kathleen Ethel Dawes, of Greenwich, Conn., whom Manchester married Hie clay his first wife's divorce decree was effective, December 17, 1931. The referee, attempting to Interpret Inter-pret British law, holds that the rights of the former duchess ended with her divorce. "The provision should not be considered as referring to the particular person who was the duke's wife at the time of the execution of the will." So the dowager duchess is in tlm legal picture as bestowing half benefits bene-fits in an estate of nearly two mil-lions, mil-lions, not on the "wife," the mother of her grandchildren, whom she knew, but on some unknown woman whom the duke might later marry, Most reasoners will hold that the Intention In-tention of the testator is Ignored. Incidentally, the fortune is largely .American in origin. Consuelo, the ( dowager, was the daughter of An- I tonio Yznaga de Valle, of Ravens- wood, La. Apparently the mother had some idea of the marital instability of her ducal son, for she granted the use and enjoyment of a lot of family jewels to "the wife for the time being" be-ing" of the duke "during her marriage mar-riage with my son." In these days complications of this sort may happen hap-pen in the best of families. Internationalism Interna-tionalism is rarely involved. Whetli-' Whetli-' er the report of this referee will be affirmed by the court we can only guess. It has a keen interest for students of modern divorce law. Brooklyn Eagle. |
