|
a.
|
Note: 85-g5Le7 Jacob5 U. Leggett born April 19, 1815
died December 1890
It is doubtful that he ever married.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
He is found in the 1870 U. S. Census for Saratoga, Saratoga Co., N. Y. in the household of Andrew Dorland, widower, 75. Jacob is 56, At home, "Idiotic"
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Provision in Thomas Leggett's will of 24 January 1834 affecting his son, Jacob U. Leggett:
Third: I authorize and direct my executors and the survivors and survivor of them in case my son Jacob shall survive his mother to provide in such manner as they shall think fit, a comfortable maintenance for him at such place as they may think fit, during his life, and to defray the expense thereof out of my Estate as hereinafter expressed.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Subsequent legal action in furtherance of above provision as of 1891, following the death of Jacob U. Leggett, as the court is petitioned to divide the remaining trust fund among the other heirs of Thomas Leggett:
...
4. The plaintiff further alleges that the executors named in said Will provided a comfortable maintenance for the testator's son, Jacob U. Leggett, according to the term of the said Will, from the time of the probate of said Will to the termination of the action for the partition of the real estate of the said Testator, Thomas Leggett, situate in the City of New York, as hereinafter mentioned.
...
15. The plaintiff further alleges thereafter, and in or about the year 1854 and action was commenced in the Superior Court of the City of New York, by said William H. Leggett, executor of, and devisee under the Will of Thomas Leggett, deceased, and Margaret his wife, against the said Samuel F. Mott, Thomas Leggett, Jr., and Patience, his wife, George S. Fox and Rebecca L., his wife, which said Samuel F. Mott, Thomas Leggett, Jr., and George S. Fox, are also executors of the Will of said Thomas Leggett, deceased, and the said George S. Fox, is also executor of and Trustee under the Will of Joseph Leggett deceased, Joseph Walker, executor of and Trustee under the Will of said Joseph Leggett deceased; Thomas W. Pearsall and Mary his wife, William W. Fox and Charlotte his wife, Elizabeth Leggett, Sally Ann Leggett, James Shaw Leggett, Joseph Leggett, Isabel Leggett, George P. Leggett, Elizabeth Leggett, the younger, Barney Corse and Mary E., his wife, William H. Schermerhorn, and Charlotte F., his wife, Benjamin Cox and Martha L., his wife, Thomas S. Willets and Rebecca, his wife, Samuel Leggett and Ann Eliza, his wife, the said Benjamin Cox, William H. Schermerhorn and Samuel Leggett, being executors of and trustees under the last will and testament of Samuel Leggett, deceased, and the said Rebecca, and the said Samuel Leggett, being executors of and trustees under the will of Elizabeth Leggett, deceased, Jacob U. Leggett, Caroline H. Leggett, Elizabeth H. Leggett, William F. Leggett, Jr., Sarah H. Leggett, Louisa Leggett, John B. Wilson, James B. Wilson, Margaret Ring, Lousia Ring, William F. Leggett and Sarah H., his wife, to obtain a partition among the said parties entitled thereto of the real estate of which the said Thomas Leggett died seized, situate in the City and County of New York, and such proceeding were had therein; that by an order of the said Court made on the 13th day of May, 1854, it was among other things referred to John L. Mason, Esq., as Referee to take proof of the plaintiffs' title and interest in the premises in the complaint in said action mentioned, and of the right, title and interest of the several defendants therein; and that he report such proof, and an abstract of the conveyances by which such title is held and also what share or proportion of such premises belongs to each of the parties in the action, and the nature and extent of their respective titles or interests therein, and that he inquire and report whether the said premises or any part thereof are so circumstanced that a partition thereof cannot be made without great prejudice to the owners thereof, and that he state the particular facts and circumstances which render a partition impracticable or prejudicial to the interests of the parties, and if the Referee should be of opinion that a sale of such premises or any part thereof is necessary, that he also ascertain and report whether any creditor not a party to the action has a specific lien on the undivided interest or share of any of the parties in the premises by mortgage, devise or otherwise; and the name and residence of such creditor, and the nature of such lien and encumbrance, if any there be, as far as the same can be ascertained by him; and in case the said Referee should find that there is no specific lien in favor of any person not a party to the said suit, that he further inquire and report whether the undivided share or interest of any of the parties in the premises whereof partition is sought is subject to any general lien or encumbrance by judgment or decree, and ascertain and report the amount due any party to the action, who has either a general or specific lien on the premises to be divided or any part thereof, and also the amount due any creditor not a party who has a general lien on any undivided share or interest therein by judgment or decree, and who shall appear and establish his claim on such reference, and also that said Referee, if requested by either of the parties appearing before him on such reference should also ascertain and report the amount due any creditor not a party to the action, which is either a specific or general lien or encumbrance upon all the shares or interests of the parties in the premises to be sold, and which would remain an encumbrance thereon in the hands of the purchaser.
16. The plaintiff further alleges that the said Referee duly complied with the directions in said order contained, and duly made his report thereof, bearing date the 2d day of April, 1855, to the said Superior Court of the City of New York, and that in and by said report he set forth, among other things, an abstract of the conveyances by which the title to the said premises of which the said testator, Thomas Leggett, died seized and possessed, was held, and also set forth the rights and interests of the several parties to the suit, in and to the said premises; and that the whole of the said premises described in the complaint was subject to the charge on the same created by the testator, Thomas Leggett, of a comfortable maintenance for his son, Jacob U. Leggett; and he certified and reported that a provision ought to be made before any partition of the said estate, for the comfortable maintenance of the said Jacob U. Leggett, according to the will of the testator, Thomas Leggett; and that this could be done either by setting apart a portion of the real estate for that purpose, or by selling a portion and investing the proceeds so as to secure him a sufficient maintenance, and the said Referee, in and by his said report, was of opinion that it would be proper to set apart or sell so much of the premises for the support of the said Jacob U. Leggett, during his life, as would produce a net income of eight hundred dollars per annum.
17. And the plaintiff further alleges that thereafter, by the order or decree of the said Superior Court of the City of New York, made in the said action, on the 11th day of July, 1855, at a Special Term thereof, the said report of the said John L. Mason, the Referee appointed as aforesaid, was confirmed in all respects, and the rights, interests and estates of the several parties to the action in the said lands and premises of the said Thomas Leggett, deceased, were adjudged, declared and established, and it was therein and thereby adjudged and decreed that the said entire estate of said Thomas Leggett sought to be partitioned in said action, was subject to a charge created by the testator, Thomas Leggett, of a comfortable maintenance for his son, Jacob U. Leggett, during his natural life, and that provision should be made for him by setting apart or selling so much of the said estate for his support during his life as would produce a net income of eight hundred dollars per annum, and that after such provision shall have been made out of the said estate for the comfortable maintenance of the said Jacob U. Leggett, the said estate was ordered to be divided by the Commissioners therein appointed for that purpose, and allotted and assigned to the parties respectively entitled thereto, and that the said Commissioners, before dividing the said premises and assigning and allotting the portions thereof as in said decree directed, were required to select such portion or parts of the said premises as would upon a sale thereof furnish sufficient moneys to be invested for the comfortable maintenance of the defendant, Jacob U. Leggett.
18. And the plaintiff further alleges that, in pursuance of the said decree, the Commissioners therein appointed made partition of the said premises, which in and by the said decree they were required to make, and that they allotted and set apart for the said Jacob U. Leggett so much of the said premises for his support, during his life, as would produce a net income of eight hundred dollars per annum, which said premises were particularly described in said report, and reference thereto being had, will more fully and at large appear, and that thereafter by the judgment or decree of the said Superior Court of the City of New York, made in the said action on the 27th day of December, 1855, at a Special Term thereof, the Hon. Joseph S. Bosworth, one of the Justices of said Court presiding, the said report of the said Commissioners was in all respects ratified and confirmed, and the partition so made by the said Commissioners of the said premises was adjudged and decreed to be firm and effectual forever, and it was therein and thereby further ordered, adjudged and decreed, that all and singular of the said thereinbefore described part or allotment of the said premises allotted, assigned and set apart to the said defendant, Jacob U. Leggett, for his support during his life, with the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging or in any wise appertaining, be sold at public auction by or under the direction of John L. Mason, Esq., a counselor of this Court who was thereby appointed Referee for the purpose of the said decree; and it was further therein and thereby ordered, adjudged and decreed, that the said Referee after deducting therefrom his fees and disbursements, pay the entire proceeds of the sale of the portion of the premises, allotted and set apart for the said defendant Jacob U. Leggett, for his support and maintenance during his life, after deducting therefrom all taxes, assessments, which may be a lien thereon, to William H. Leggett, Samuel F. Mott, Thomas Leggett and George S. Fox, the executors of the last will and testament of Thomas Leggett, deceased, and that the said executors invest the said proceed in bond and mortgage, and pay the interest thereof to the said Jacob U. Leggett for and during the period of his natural life, and after his death dispose of the said principal money according to the requirements and directions of the said last will and testament, with respect to the testators' real estate in the city of New York.
19. And the plaintiff further alleges that the said John L. Mason, the said Referee in pursuance of the terms of the said judgment duly sold at public auction, the premises so allotted, assigned and set apart to the said Jacob U. Leggett for his support, during his life and paid over the net proceeds of the sale thereof, amounting to the sum of fifteen thousand six hundred and forty-seven dollars and seventy-five cents ($15,647.75) to the said William H. Leggett, Samuel F. Mott, Thomas Leggett and George S. Fox, the executors of the last will and testament of Thomas Leggett, deceased, and that the said executors and the survivors and survivor of them duly invested the said proceeds of said sale, and established and set up the trust for the said Jacob U. Leggett, as in said decree directed, and paid the interest and income arising therefrom to the support and maintenance of the said Jacob U. Leggett, from the time the said moneys were paid over to them, as aforesaid until they, the said executors, had all departed this life.
20. And the plaintiff further alleges that after the death of all the said executors of the said last will and testament of Thomas Leggett, deceased, this plaintiff and Rebecca L. Fox, by an order or determination of the Surrogate of the County of Westchester, duly made on the 11th day of April, 1866, were appointed the administratrices of the estate of the said Thomas Leggett with the will annexed; and that they duly qualified as such administratrices and entered upon the discharge of the duties of their office, and acted as such together until the death of the said Rebecca L. Fox, on the 14th day of April, 1878, and ever since said time the plaintiff has been, and now is, the sole surviving administratrix with the will annexed of the goods, chattels and credits left unadministered of said Thomas Leggett, deceased.
21. The plaintiff further alleges that at the time of her appointment as administratrix with the will annexed, etc., of the said Thomas Leggett, deceased, as aforesaid, there were the following property and assets of the estate of the said deceased unadministered, and which formed the principal of the trust fund so established and set up as aforesaid, for the comfortable support and maintenance of the said Jacob U. Leggett, under the Will of his father, and the unexpended accumulation of the income therefrom, viz: $16,000 invested in bonds and mortgages, and $3,000 in the bonds of the Government of the United States, and the sum of $650.31 in cash, and that the plaintiff as such administratrix as aforesaid, took possession of the said assets and property, and has ever since had, held and been possessed of the same for the said purpose of the said will; that she has invested and re-invested the principal thereof, from time to time, since her said appointment, and that during all said time, she has out of the income arising from the said trust property provided a comfortable support and maintenance for the said Jacob U. Leggett, until the death of the said Jacob U. Leggett, which occurred on the 21st day of December, 1890, and that she has from time to time, and until the death of the said Jacob U. Leggett, invested and re-invested the income arising from said trust fund not required for the comfortable support and maintenance of the said Jacob U. Leggett; and that the plaintiff now has in her possession securities of the par value of sixty-five thousand dollars ($65,000) belonging to the said Trust fund, and being assets and property of the estate of the said Thomas Leggett, deceased, which she brings into Court to be distributed, divided and disposed of, as ordered by the said decree of the said Superior Court of the City of New York, according to the requirements and directions of the said last will and testament of the said Thomas Leggett, deceased, with respect to the said testator's real estate, in the city of New York.
22. The plaintiff further alleges that the said executors of the said Thomas Leggett, deceased, prior to their death, duly accounted before the Surrogate of said Westchester County, and were discharged as such, and that the aforementioned judgment or decree of the Superior Court of the City of New York, made in the said action for petition herein before mentioned, was fully carried out, and that the real estate of the said Thomas Leggett, situate in the city of New York, was partitioned and divided according to his said will, and she is informed and believes that there are no other property or assets of the said Thomas Leggett unadministered save what is in the possession of this plaintiff, as above mentioned, and that no other property or assets of the said Thomas Leggett, deceased has come into the hands of the plaintiff.
...
66. And the said plaintiff further alleges that the said fund now in the plaintiff's possession belongs to the following named parties to this action, subject to the payment of the plaintiff's commissions, the expenses of administration and of this action, in the following proportions:
[See the Notes for Jacob's sister, Elizabeth, for the proportional division of this fund, as it is too long to list here.]
67. That owing to the death of the said Jacob U. Leggett, the estate of the said Thomas Leggett, the elder, now in the hands of the plaintiff, can now be settled and paid to those entitled thereto; and that this plaintiff is desirous of rendering an account in this action of her proceedings as administratrix of the will annexed of the goods, chattels and credits left unadministered of the said Thomas Leggett, deceased, and finally settling his estate so far as the same can now be done.
Wherefore, the plaintiff now asks the Judgment of this Court directing her to whom and in what proportions and how to distribute the said estate; that this Court may determine the rights of all the parties in said estate, and that the said plaintiff may make and render an account of her proceedings as administratrix as aforesaid; and that the costs and expenses of this action be paid out of said estate, and that the plaintiff may have such other or further relief or both in the premises as shall be just and equitable.
JOHN THEALL,
Plaintiff's Attorney.
Office and Post Office Address,
Nos. 45 & 47 Wall Street,
New York City.
City and County of New York, ss.:
ANNA SCHELL, being duly affirmed, says that she is the plaintiff in the above entitled action; that the foregoing complaint is true of her own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to by alleged on information and belief, and that as to those matters she believes it to be true.
Affirmed before me, this
[handwritten: 2nd] day of [handwritten: November]
1891
[handwritten:
Anna Schell.
John F. Forrester
Notary Public (60)
N. Y. Co.]
............................................
From pp. 16, 33-41 and 100-116 of:
ANNA SCHELL, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SOLE SURVIVING ADMINSTRATRIX,
WITH THE WILL ANNEXED OF THE GOODS, CHATTELS AND CREDITS
LEFT UNADMINISTERED OF THOMAS LEGGETT, DECEASED,
Plaintiff,
Against
MARY E. CORSE, AND OTHERS,
Defendants.
SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT.
JOHN THEALL,
Plaintiff's Attorney,
Nos. 45 and 47 Wall Street,
New York City.
Robert B. King, Printer, 89 William St., N. Y.
Dated New York, October 1, 1891.
Electronically transcribed, March 2003, by David John Leggett, b. 1961, 4th great grandson of Thomas Leggett, 1755-1843.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Below is a rather inaccurate account of the proceedings above. Of course, Thomas died in 1843, not 1840. The trustee was to take charge of the $65,000, which was not Jacob's share of the estate, but the amount of the original trust fund and its earnings which was in excess of the amount needed to support him from the fund's creation in the 1850s until his death in 1890. Jacob only lived to age 75 (1815-1890), not nearly 100. $65,000 was a considerable sum in 1891; comparable to at least a million in 2003 dollars. Of course, there were many more heirs than 65, so many of these heirs never received an appreciable amount of money. The most any one heir received in an unrestricted sum (not a life estate subject to remainder) was 1/16th, or $4,062.50; the least, 1/700th, or $92.85. DJL 7 March 2003
New York Times, July 29, 1892
AN HEIR FOR EACH THOUSAND
Judge Andrews, in Supreme Court Chambers, was asked yesterday to appoint a trustee to take charge of $1,000, which was alleged to be due Mrs. Mary126-g6Le7 E. Corse, daughter of Samuel73-g5Le7 Leggett, through the will of her grandfather, Thomas31-g4Le7 Leggett, who died in 1840.
By Thomas31-g4Le7 Leggett's will $5,000 was bequeathed to August Schell in trust for a son, Jacob5 Leggett, who was weak-minded. Jacob5, it was thought, would not live long. He died about two years ago, aged nearly one hundred. At his death it was found that his $5,000 had increased to $65,000. He had made no will, and the $65,000 became a part of the residue of Thomas31-g4Le7 Leggett's estate. It is said that there are sixty-five heirs of Thomas31-g4Le7 Leggett entitled to a share of the $65,000. Mrs. Corse is a grandchild, eighty-six years old. No decision was made on the application.
|
