Crossle Record
Page 55
to Nicholl being satisfied by perception of the profits Charles Beatty entered into possession of the lands of Gortendarragh by virtue of said letters of admon (sic), and said Francis never was possessed thereof or made any claim thereto during his life, but permitted Charles Beatty to peaceably possess same. That Francis Beatty died in the year 1727 but made his will whereby he devised all his substance to one William Smith his relation who in 1727 proffered his bill in this Hon. Court against said Charles Beatty and others on account of said lands of Gortondarragh and the other assets of said Robert Beatty, under colour that by the death of Samuel the whole interest survived to Robert, and that Francis Beatty as son of Robert was the heir, and that the letters of admon of the goods of Robert and Samuel granted to Charles Beaty was in trust for Francis Beatty, and that he (Wm Smith) by virtue of the will of Francis Beatty was heir to said land and lease. Whereas Plts charge that Robert Beatty never was married to the mother of Francis and that though he was the son he was not legitimate heir and could claim no more that a moiety of said lease of Gortondarragh, in regard that by the death of Samuel Beatty whose interest therein did not survive to Robert, but that he held his (Sam’s) moiety without any title during the rest of his life, and that in his lifetime he was and his representatives still are accountable for same. That admon of the goods of Samuel Beatty being granted in 1728 to Charles Beatty, after the decease of Robert, said moiety of Gortondarragh which belonged to Samuel (he having died intestate) became vested in Plt. Arthur as one of the brothers of Samuel for a share thereof. That Charles Beatty, who by virtue of said admon got posson (sic) of sd lands, being conscious he was only a trustee and accountable to Plt. Arthur for his share, and having no issue, and being minded to keep the whole during his own life, he without answering said bill so filed by Wm Smith against him, agreed with Smith, in case he left no issue he would leave Smith a considerable part of his affects, which agreement Smith (knowing he had no title) accepted. That Charles Beatty, by will dated in 1728, in case he should d.s.p., devised to Plt. Mary Beatty a third part of his substance for her life, then to go to his exor, and also devised to Plt. Arthur Beatty ƒ20, and the rest of his substance whatsoever, in case he should die without lawful issue, to said Wm. Smith, and appointed Smith exor. That Smith alleged Charles Beatty perfected a bond bearing equal date with said will whereby he became bound to Smith in ƒ1000 penalty that he would not alter said will. That Charles Beatty by a subsequent will dated 7 January 1731, without taking any notice of the former will (insisted upon by Smith) devised all his substance to Plt. Arthur subject to the legacies therein mentioned to Plt. Mary his wife and others, and appointed Plt. Arthur Beatty and Wm Tweedy exors, and died soon after. That Plt. Arthur Beatty had no knowledge of said former will or bond (now insisted upon by Smith) and accordingly proved
|
