A ROMANTIC LAWSUIT.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XLIX, Issue 12632, 20 October 1905, Page 2

A ROMANTIC LAWSUIT.

A MILLION FRANCS A-MISSING

Sir Robert Stout, Chief Justice, with their Honours Justioas Williams, Denniston. Edwards, Cooper, and Chapman, on Tuesday constituted the Court of Appeal ißenoh which had to consider a question of a somewhat romantic and also complicated character. The plaintiff v*a« Mary Ann Sells, and the defendants Arthur Edgar Gravencr

Rhodes and Waiter Empson. Mr George Harper, of ChVistchmr.h, appeared as counsel for the plaintiff, and Mr Yon Haast, of Wellington, fo: the defendants.

Mr Harper explained to tho Court 'tihaib this was a special case jvniovftd i)jto the Court of Appeal by consent of the parties to the action, for ilia purpose of obtaining the opinion, of the Court on the questions ni mw arising out of the statement of facts a.s agreed to between the pan-tie's. The main qntstion was as to whether the domicile ■of the deceased testator wis m Italy oi' in the colony cf New Zoaliml. The facts, as stated in th<j special case for the consideration of the Court, are briefly as follows: —The tostatci was the late Marq.iis Arti:? G;-ico)j:e Bertie Taliacarao. Hu lather was th.^ Marquis Andrea Taiiaoarne, who was a native of Genoa, an' Italian sijl'-jm-i, and at one time Ambassador of the ti*on King of Sardinia- to various countries. He married an Englisliv/cunan, and when he wias Ambassador for Sardinia at The Hague, in 1859, the testator was bora of the marriage in London. The testator lived with his father and mother in different countries, until he was sent to Harrow, and subsequently to Oxford University, for his education ; and afterwards ihe was entered by his father oifc Genoa, on the Regisitesr of the Military 'Levy. On the death of his father, tlhe testator 'became possessed of an lanoestral property at Genoa, and in other pants of Ibaily. Up to 1881, when the testator left Oxford, ihe had always bean known as " the ■Marquis Arthur James Bertie TatHaoaa-ne." In '■bat year die _ left for New Zealand, taking a considerable sum of mtoney with fiiim, which h© proceeded to invest ■in freehold land and in mortgages in thia colony. When he first arrived in New Zealand he 'opened ta bank account in the name of " A. J. Bej-fcie' Taiiacame," but in July, 1882, he altered the name in his account to " A. G. Bertie." A year lalter he bought land in Canterbury and farmed it for three years. In 1886 he bought land at Tamahunga, in the Kaipara district, and resided there until 1891, when he obtained land at Rata Mat, near Wanganui, which he resided upon and fanned until the time of his death in 1892. He did not personally receive firom >his property in Italy any of the income, but it was received on his account in that country by a person appointed under power of attorney ito receive and invest all income from the property. The income so received amounted to some 1,000,000 francs, and after th© testator's death it was discovered that this peirson, who had become bankrupt, had lest oir appropriated the whole of that sum. From the year 1881 until his death, in 1892; the testator was known and called by the name of " Arthur James Bertie' only. During that period he visited England on three occasions, and on two of these occasions went to Italy for a short time.

In 1890 the testator married tihe trlaintiff, who was a British subject. He was married under the name of "Arthur Jiames Bertde," but in filling in the marriage certificate' he gave his late father's and mother's names, as " Tailia(sa/rne," and also gave their tittles. After +estatotr's death the plaintiff went to Italy with her infant daughter, Mary Vincenza, in faccoirdaiice with the wish of the testator, and sihe has since then ■re-mJarried, her husband being Charles De Grave Sells, a civil engineer, at present residing at' Corniglia.no, in the Italian province of Liguria. The present plaintiff, Miary Ann Sells, an May last commenced an .action, praying that tihe grant of probate to the will of 'her late husband might be recalled .and revoked, and the questions submitted far the opinion of the Court of Appeal were—What, on the facts, was the domicile of the testator at tihe time of the making of his will and of ihis death? If the Court <wias of opinion that the testator's domicile was in New Zealand, then judgment in this action should be entered for the defendants. If the Court held that the domicile of the testator was in Italy, it had been agreed between the parties that the action should proceed foa- the 'purpose iof asoS'rtain'ing the Law of Italy and its application to the will and codicils of the testator.

Their Hon'oiirs, after hearing argument, reserved their decisions. —" New Zealand Times." '