Adelaide Mary Louise Bayly [1371] ²

   FamilySearch ID: 9787-XRN.

  Birth Notes:

"Havilah".

  Noted events in her life were:

• Court Notice: CADELL V. BAYLY AND OTHERS, 1884 May 21. ⁶ LAW REPORT. (1884, May 21). The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954), p. 5. Retrieved October 21, 2011, from <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article28369504>

SUPREME COURT.-TUESDAY, MAY 20
In Banco.-(Before their Honors the CHIEF JUSTICE, Mr. Justice FAUCETT, and Mr. Justice INNES.)
CADELL V. BAYLY AND OTHERS
This was an appeal on behalf of Surah Cadell and Ade-laide Mary Louise Bayly against the decision of the Pri-mary Judge on the 17th April last, which declared that Alfred Bayly took absolutely the whole of the share under the testator's will to which the deceased Nioholas Paget Bayly was entitled for life, for the following amongst other grounds :-That the clause in the will "if either my sons should depart this life without issue their portions shall revert to the other." would only take effect if the Havilah Estate were not sold before the said Nicholas Paget Bayly attained the age of 23 years, and that upon the death of the said Nicholas Paget Bayly his share passed to the sisters wholly or in part as his heirs-at-law or next of kin. Mr. Gordon, Q.C., and Mr. Lingon appeared for the appellants ; Mr. Owen, Q.C., and Dr. Donovan for Alfred Bayly; Mr. A. H. Simpson for Sarah Amelia Bayly, widow of the testator ; Mr. Gregory Walker for Mr. and Mrs. Newbatt ; Dr. Sly for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Cullen for Mr. and Mrs. Skinner. A suit was instituted some time ago for the purpose of con-struing the will of the late Nicholas Paget Bayly, the elder. There were several bequests and devises taking the form of giving an estate for life, and afterwards directing that the principal of the invested money should go to the heirs of the children, and the question arose as to what estate the children took in these different investments. It was then determined that they took an estate for life, leaving the question undetermined as to what was the meaning of the limitation afterwards to their heir. "The present suit was instituted for the purpose of dealing with that question primarily, but the question arose whether the clauses of the will already quoted did not in fact invest the share of NicholasPadget Bayly the younger in Alfred Bayly. The Primary Judge determined that the interest did pass to Alfred Bayly. The Full Court was now asked to express an opinion upon this decision.
After hearing argument,
The CHIEF JUSTICE said it was contended, from tho position in which the clause referred to in tho appeal ap-peared in the will, and from the subsequent limitations with reference to the proceeds of the Havilah Estate, that it was manifestly the intention of the testator not to apply that portion of the clause to a condition of things that might arise under the subsequent portions of the will. He had looked through the will and considered it carefully during the progress of the argument, and he failed to see anything which limited the general application of the clause. lt did not matter in what portion of the will any particular stipulation might be. They could transpose sen-tences, and put them in a position different from that in in which they were put by the testator, for the purpose of interpreting it, and ascertaining what the intention was. And in reference to a clause of this kind, if they saw plainly that the intention of the testa-tor was on the death of one of his sons, to transfer the in-terest to the survivor, he saw no reason why they should apply that clause in the will to any portion of the estate more than another, and limit its general application. The words plainly indicated, and he saw no reason why they should not read them in their plain obvious sense, that if either of the sons should die without issue them the benefit conferred upon him should revert to the other, and it did not matter in what, part of the will it was so declared. To warrant any other interpretation than that it would be necessary to vary the words in the will, and, in other words, make a new will for the testator. He saw nothing to warrant the interpretation contended for on behalf of the sitters, and being of that opinion, he thought the Primary Judge was right, and the appeal ought to be dismissed.
Mr. Justice FAUUETT said that although the matter was surrounded by some difficulty still on the whole the con-clusion they must arrive at was tolerably clear. There was no doubt that the testator had two kinds of disposition of his property in view when making his will, and had them in view at the time he drew out the particular clause in question. It was evident that in the former portion of the will the testator was contemplating that which he referred to in the latter portion, namely, the sale of Havilah, and that portion of the will was simply an expansion of the earlier part. It was evident that he had in view the double object of disposing of his property as real estate if it should not be sold, and also at the same time disposing of the proceeds if it should be sold as he directed. They must, therefore, consider this clause as if the testator intended to apply it to the whole will, and that being so, he was of opinion that the Primary Judge was right.
Mr. Justice INNES said that on the whole, though, not without some doubt, he concurred in the judgment at which their Honors had arrived, that the decree of the Primary Judge was the correct one.
Appeal dismissed

• Court: Bayly V Bowker, 1903 Nov 3, New South Wales, Australia. ⁷ LAW REPORT. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 2. (1903, November 3). The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954), p. 7. Retrieved October 21, 2011, from <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article14577053>

THE CONSTRUCTION OF A WILL.
Bayly V Bowker.
Mr. Pilcher, K.C., and Dr. Cullen, instructed by Mr. Henry Salway, appeared for the appellant, Ade-laide Mary Louise Monday ; Mr. Gordon amd Mr. Rick, instructed by Messrs. Marchall and Marks, for respondent Florence Mary Bowker ; and Mr. Lingen, instructed by Messrs. Jones and Jones, for their re-spondent Sarah Amelia Bayly. This matter, which related to the trusts of the will of the late Nicholas Paget Bayly, of Havilah, near Mudgee, grazier, came before the Court by appeal on the part of-Mrs. Monday against the construction placed upon the Will by the Chief Judge in Equity, who found in favour of the respondents. Before the appeal was proceeded with counsel had a consultation after which Dr. Cullen announced that the matter had been settled on terms which were not mentioned. The appeal might be dismissed, costs out of the fund allowed to appellant and plantiff, Sarah Amelia Bayly (trustee) and Florence Mary Bowker. As regarded the parties to the suit who had not appeared, there was an affidavit of service of notice of the appeal, and mentioning that appellant abandoned the second ground of appeal, and that the first ground should be the only issue if the appeal went on.
Appeal accordingly dismissed.

• Registration: Death, 1930, Sydney District, New South Wales, Australia. ⁸ 10686/1930
MONDAY
ADELAIDE M L
67 YRS SYDNEY

SYDNEY

• Death Notice, 1930 Jul 29. ⁹ Family Notices. (1930, July 29). The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954), p. 8. Retrieved October 24, 2011, from <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article16663228>

MONDAY_July 26 at Darlinghurst. Adelaide Mary Louise, relict of the late Reginald Charles Monday, aged 67 years.

• Death Notice, 1930 Aug 2. ¹⁰ MRS. R. C. MONDAY. (1930, August 2). The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954), p. 20. Retrieved October 20, 2011, from <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article16692659>

MRS. R. C. MONDAY.
Mrs. Adelaide Mary Louise Monday died recently at her residence, Springfield-avenue, Darlinghurst, at the age of 67 years. She was the widow of Mr. Richard Charles Monday, who was for many years Registrar of the Probate Court, and a daughter of the late Mr. Nicholas Paget Bayly, the original owner of Havilah Station, Mudgee. One daughter survives, Mrs. Stuart Furley, and four grandchildren, of Appian Way, Burwood. The remains were cremated at Rookwood.

• Probate, 1930 Sep 2. ¹¹ Item number or control symbol: 4-169210ntbl Title: Mary Louise Monday - Date of Death 26/07/1930, Granted On 02/09/1930ntbl Start date:ntbl End date:ntblntbl Record series containing this item:13660 <http://investigator.records.nsw.gov.au/Entity.aspx?Path=%5CSeries%5C13660> Probate packets <http://investigator.records.nsw.gov.au/Entity.aspx?Path=%5CSeries%5C13660> starts by 01 Apr 1817 <http://investigator.records.nsw.gov.au/Entity.aspx?Path=%5CSeries%5C13660> ntblntbl Access directions:359 <http://investigator.records.nsw.gov.au/Entity.aspx?Path=%5CAccessDirection%5C359> Effect: Early; Duration: 5 years from grant of probate <http://investigator.records.nsw.gov.au/Entity.aspx?Path=%5CAccessDirection%5C359> ntblntbl Item control status: Item Lists available for part of holdings (Series 1, 2 and 3 and part of Series 4). Please contact reading rooms for assistance.ntblntbl Images:ntblntbl Availability:ntblntbl Home location:Repository:State Records (Western Sydney Records Centre)ntbl City/Town:KingswoodntblDirections:Reading Room open 9am-5pm Monday-Friday, 10am-4pm Saturday. Closed public holidays. See Archives in Brief 8.ntblContact details:http://www.records.nsw.gov.au/contact-us/addresses-opening-hours/western-sydney-records-centre <javascript:openWindow(%22http://www.records.nsw.gov.au/contact-us/addresses-opening-hours/western-sydney-records-centre%22);>

• Probate, 1930 Sep 3. ¹² WILLS AND BEQUESTS. (1930, September 3). The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954), p. 8. Retrieved October 20, 2011, from <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article16673858>

WILLS AND BEQUESTS.
LATE MRS. A. M. L. MONDAY.
Probate has been granted of the will of Adelaide Mary Louise Monday, widow of Reg-inald C. Monday, formerly Registrar of Pro-bates, Sydney, who died on July 26, last, at the age of 67 years, leaving an estate valued at £23,621. Testatrix appointed her daughter, Daphne Victoria Furley, of Burwood, wife of Stuart Ebenezer Furley, her sole executrix. Testatrix left £200 to her son-in-law, S. E. Furley, £75 each to Nicholas Bayly Dudley Bowman Cadell and his wife, Nellie Cadell, and £100 to their daughter, Eveline Mary Cadell. She directed her trustees to invest £2000, and pay the income thereof to Mr. and Mrs. Cadell during their lives, and after their death, the same to be paid to their children. She gave her household effects, together with the Havilah trophy, won by her father,Nicholas Paget Bayly, to her daughter, Daphne Victoria Furley. The residue of the estate was left to D. V. Furley, and after her death to the children of D. V. Furley In equal shares.

Adelaide married Reginald Charles Monday [1372] [LK66-T1J] [MRIN: 326], son of Arthur W Monday [17424] [LK66-YW5] and Parthenia W. [17425], on 1885 Mar 12 in Sydney, Cumberland County, New South Wales.¹ (Reginald Charles Monday [1372] [LK66-T1J] was born in 1861 in Sydney, Cumberland County, New South Wales,¹³ died on 1920 Apr 1 in Summer Hill, Cumberland County, New South Wales, Australia ¹⁴ and was buried in 1920 in Sydney, Cumberland County, New South Wales, Australia ⁵.)

  Noted events in their marriage were:

• Marriage Notice, 1885 Mar 13. ¹⁵ Family Notices. (1885, March 13). The Sydney Morning Herald (NSW : 1842 - 1954), p. 1. Retrieved October 24, 2011, from <http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article13582981>

MONDAY\emdash BAYLY.\emdash March 12, at Christ Church, Sydney, by the Rev. C. F. Garnsey, Reginald Charles, youngest son of the late A. W. Monday, to Adelaide Mary Louise (Daisy), youngest daughter of the late N. P. Bayly.

  Marriage Notes:

At Christ Church, Sydney.