Summary

Taylor v. Benham — Opinion of the Court

I do hereby will, order, give, grant and devise all the remainder or residue of my estate which shall be remaining, after paying the before-mentioned legacies, to my dearly beloved brother, Samuel Taylor, of the parish of Drumblait and shire of Aberdeen, in Scotland, and to my beloved sister, Mary Taylor, of the same place, share and share alike, provided they shall both be alive at the time of my decease, and have issue, which issue, after their respective deaths, shall share the same equally
Source: Wikisource

Taylor v. Benham — Opinion of the Court

All the personal property on a credit of twelve months from the day of sale, purchasers giving notes of hand or bonds, with security, to the satisfaction of my executors; and all landed or real property belonging, or in any wise appertaining to me, shall be sold on a credit of one, two, and three years, by equal instalments, purchasers to give bond, bearing interest from the date, with securities to the satisfaction of my executors, and, moreover, a mortgage on the premises.'
The second section gave a legacy to his negro woman Sylvia.
Source: Wikisource

Taylor v. Benham — Opinion of the Court

The bill was originally filed by Samuel Taylor, the father of William, George, Eliza, and Elspet, together with his nephews, William Rainey, Alexander Rainey, and his niece, Elizabeth Rainey, against George M. Savage, executor of Samuel Savage, deceased. The object of the bill was to hold the estate of Samuel Savage responsible for certain moneys which, it was alleged, he had received during his lifetime, in his capacity of executor of William F. Taylor, a citizen of the State of South Carolina, and also for his alleged neglect of lands in Kentucky, by which they were lost.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature