“All else that I possess, I give and bequeath to my dear wife, to be used for her benefit and that of our dear children, whom God bless, guide and preserve. “With my farewell love and blessing, “To all friends, “THOMAS HOOD.” WILL OF LORD HOWDEN Hamilton _v._ Dellas.--Before Vice-Chancellor Sir James Bacon.--The loss, vexation, and complexity so frequently occasioned by intestacy, was in a partial measure manifested by the lapse in the will of the late Lord Howden, and serves in good stead to show how guarded persons should be to see, not only that they leave a properly prepared and executed will, but likewise that no lapse is left unsupplied. In the case of Lord Howden, although the lapse was only trifling, considering the vast wealth of his lordship, yet it was represented by a considerable amount. The case is a very curious one, as Lord Howden held a very high status in England, being a peer of the realm, and had taken the oath and his seat in the House of Lords; he was also a G.C.B., lieutenant-general in the army, and Deputy-Lieutenant for the County of York. Notwithstanding all these ties, in 1850 he sold his estate at Grimston Park, in Yorkshire, and all his real estate in England, and went to Spain as Minister Plenipotentiary, in which position he continued till 1857, when he went to France, and resided on an estate near Bayonne, which he acquired about that time, and where he built a château called “Casa Caradoc,” in which he generally resided up to the date of his death. In 1863 he visited Scotland, and then wrote a letter declining to come to England, and expressing his intention of never doing so again; he likewise, in certain legal proceedings taken in England, claimed to be domiciled in France, _sine animo revertendi_. Lord Howden had made separate wills relating to his personal property in England and in France, and the confusion arose respecting one-fourth of that in England, the person to whom it had been bequeathed having died during his lordship’s lifetime. The question was to whom this undisposed of personalty should belong, as by English law the whole of it would pass to Lady Rose Meade, as his lordship’s nearest relation and sole next-of-kin, while, according to French law, a moiety only would pass to Lady Rose Meade, who was his lordship’s nearest relation on the father’s side, and the other moiety amongst his lordship’s nearest relations on the mother’s side. The case therefore rested on the point, whether Lord Howden’s domicile was English or French at the time of his death, and the Vice-Chancellor said that, in the absence of authority, he should be sorry at this time of day to decide that a peer could not take up his permanent residence abroad. There was nothing to prevent any one, be he peer or peasant, from leaving the country to reside abroad. He then distinguished the cases of persons actually officers in the army, and the cases known of an Anglo-Indian domicile. On the facts, he said, it