The following is one of my favourite stories from an oldie-but-goodie book called "Where There's a Will - A Collection of Wills - Hilarious, Incredible, Bizarre, Witty...Sad" by Robert S. Menchin, published by iUniverse.com Inc, copyrighted 1979 and 2000.
When prominent Canadian lawyer Charles Millar died, friends asked his former law partner whether Millar left a will. "I've found some writing in the form of a will," he replied, "but it's not a will - it's a joke. We're searching for the actual will now."
The "joke" turned out to be the Last Will and Testament of Charles Vance Millar and a few months later his former law partner was defending this "joke" in court - and defending it successfully for twelve years against repeated attacks from outraged citizens, disappointed relatives and righteous reformers who "didn't get the joke".
In the will, Millar explains it this way:
This will is necessarily uncommon and capricious because I have no dependents or near relations and no duty rests upon me to leave any property at my death and what I do leave is proof of my folly in gathering and retaining more than I required in my lifetime.
This preamble to Charles Millar's will suggest what follows: twelve clauses consisting mostly of good-natured pranks and a final caper that send hundreds of Canadian women off on a raucous race with the stork that is now known as the celebrated "Baby Derby".
Among Millar's pranks:
To the Hon. W.E. Raney, A.M. Orpen and Reverend Samuel D. Chown, each one share in the Ontario Jockey Club providing three years from my death each of them becomes enrolled as shareholders in the share register of the Club...
Dr. Chown and Judge Raney were dedicated foes of all forms of gambling, especially horse racing. Mr. Orpen operated a track in direct competition to the Jockey Club. On August 27, 1927, Dr. Chown and Judge Raney became members of the club, but five minutes later they sold their shares for fifteen hundred dollars each; Mr. Orpen retained his membership.
To each Protestant Minister exercising his clerical functions...and to each Orange Lodge in Toronto, I give one share of the O'Keefe Brewery Company of Toronto, Limited.
Of the 260 eligible clergymen, 91 accepted their shares. Of the 114 Orange Lodges, 103 did likewise. Most of the beneficiaries under this clause sold their shares and turned the $58.20 they received for each share over to charity.
Clause number nine in the will turned over Millar's home in Jamaica to three acquaintances. These men has an abiding dislike for one another, so naturally Millar thought it would be a good idea if they lived together for a while.
All this was by way of a curtain-raiser to the fertility farce inspired by the last bequest in Millar's will:
All the rest and residue of my property...at the expiration of ten years from my death...to the Mother who has...given birth in Toronto to the greatest number of children.
Canada was unprepared for the hijinks that followed. Throughout his seventy-three years of life Charles Millar was a prim, painfully proper bachelor, hardly the type who would inspire Canadian ladies to fill the maternity wards to overflowing. But there it was: the courts upheld the bequest, the money was good and the race was on.
Toronto newspapers quickly dubbed the contest "The Stork Derby" and publicized the event with feature stories as the participants carved new notches on their cribs and new entries became all too apparent. As the mothers approached the finish line, box scores were published and Canadians with sporting blood placed wagers and cheered their favourites to greater heights of achievement.
Meanwhile, Millar's second cousins and even more remote relatives hired lawyers to litigate the will out of existence. Contesters of the will claimed that the clause "encouraged immorality" and was "against public policy" but Millar was as good a lawyer as he was a prankster. The will was legally sound - again and again the court found in favor of "the unknown mother".
On May 30, 1938, Judge MacDonnell of Surrogate Court, Toronto, distributed the estate. With interest added it came to $568,106. Four prolific Toronto mothers, each with nine children born during the ten-year period, shared the prize in accordance with the terms of the will.
Mrs. Pauline Mae Clark claimed ten births during the period but her record was somewhat marred by the fact that only five of her children were also her husband's. To settle this sticky situation as well as the claim of Mrs. Lillie Kenny (four of her ten children were stillborn) consolation prizes of $12,500 were awarded to the runners-up.
In the summer of 1936, when she had her last baby, one of the winners, Mrs. Arthur Timleck, announced wearily that she was through; from here on she intended to practice - and preach - birth control. Charlie Millar would have gotten a chuckle out of that.
Practical, real-world information about wills, estates, inheritance, executors, and elder law in Canada
Showing posts with label oddball wills. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oddball wills. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Wednesday, July 25, 2012
7 Famous People with Controversial Wills
Posted by
Lynne Butler, BA LLB
To those of you who think that wills are boring legal documents, I dedicate this link to a post called 7 Famous People with Controversial Wills. It's a fun, quirky sort of read, and even though I read a lot of stories about unusual wills, there were a couple in this article I hadn't heard about before. Click here to read the article, which was recently passed on to me by http://www.lifeinsurancequotes.org/.
Saturday, August 20, 2011
Taking shots from the grave
Posted by
Lynne Butler, BA LLB
This entertaining blog post by BC lawyer Stan Rule talks about the 1933 case of Re Watts. I really like the decision that was handed down by the courts. Basically it upheld the will of a woman who left only $1 to her husband because of how he treated her, leading him to contest the will saying she was deluded. Real life is always stranger than fiction, so click here to read Mr. Rule's post about this odd case.
Monday, July 11, 2011
Can a will be written on any surface?
Posted by
Lynne Butler, BA LLB
We all know that a will must be written down, and most of us simply assume that means on regular sheets of paper. I personally have seen a will written on a series of small post-it notes, which was held by the court to be a valid will. On an earlier entry in this blog I told you about a woman who had written her will on a board. The attached article from http://www.allaboutestates.ca/ gives some pretty interesting examples of the surfaces used when a testator was in a pinch. Click here to read it.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Longtime city worker bequeaths all to employer
Posted by
Lynne Butler, BA LLB
This is an unusual news story about David John Dombrowski, who left his entire estate to his employer, Milwaukee's Department of Public Works. Mr. Dombrowski had no immediate family surviving him, so it's not the case that anyone in particular was left out. But most people at that point would opt to leave money to a charity or set up a scholarship. Hopefully Mr. Dombrowski's extended family will honour his wishes without a fight. To read the story from http://www.jsonline.com/ , click here.
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Controlling from the grave (some light reading)
Posted by
Lynne Butler, BA LLB
We've all seen Wills in which the testator tries with varying degrees of success to control the behaviour of those left behind by using his/her Will. I've found several lately through my own research, all from the 1800s. For those of you who like oddball Will bequests and requests as much as I do... enjoy!
Nicholas Ash of Newfoundland, 1842, left the sum of 20 pounds a year for the support of his widow "as long as she shall remain in a state of widowhood and acting discreetly...but if she acts otherwise, the sum of one shilling."
William Andrews in 1844 spent pages detailing the gifts to his sons, but finished off his Will by saying that if "either or both of my sons should so far forget their duty as man and Christians as to give way to execessive drink" then they would forfeit the inheritance.
John Antle of Dorset, England, 1841, leaves money to someone he refers to as "my son or reputed son".
Problematic sons were also an issue for John Alcock in 1898, as in his Will he said that since his two sons "left me without my consent", he was cutting them off with only a shilling each.
John Archer made a religious statement in 1868 by saying that if any of his children should "abjure the Protestant religion or become Roman Catholics" then they would forfeit their inheritance.
Richard Allen, 1894, left money for his son to maintain Richard's widow but said that if his son "disrespected her" she could have all the money herself.
My favourite by far of my latest batch is the Will of Patrick Stafford of Wexford, Ireland, who in his 1838 Will directed his "confidential friends" to "punish any or either of my children as they would their own if they should become wayward or refractory".
Nicholas Ash of Newfoundland, 1842, left the sum of 20 pounds a year for the support of his widow "as long as she shall remain in a state of widowhood and acting discreetly...but if she acts otherwise, the sum of one shilling."
William Andrews in 1844 spent pages detailing the gifts to his sons, but finished off his Will by saying that if "either or both of my sons should so far forget their duty as man and Christians as to give way to execessive drink" then they would forfeit the inheritance.
John Antle of Dorset, England, 1841, leaves money to someone he refers to as "my son or reputed son".
Problematic sons were also an issue for John Alcock in 1898, as in his Will he said that since his two sons "left me without my consent", he was cutting them off with only a shilling each.
John Archer made a religious statement in 1868 by saying that if any of his children should "abjure the Protestant religion or become Roman Catholics" then they would forfeit their inheritance.
Richard Allen, 1894, left money for his son to maintain Richard's widow but said that if his son "disrespected her" she could have all the money herself.
My favourite by far of my latest batch is the Will of Patrick Stafford of Wexford, Ireland, who in his 1838 Will directed his "confidential friends" to "punish any or either of my children as they would their own if they should become wayward or refractory".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

