SMITHSONIAN BEQUEST. 51 



Mr. Pemberton, our leading counsel, rose, and after recapitulating 

 the general nature of the case, as formerl}- heard by the court, pro- 

 ceeded to state that the reference to the master as ordered by the 

 decree in February, 1837, had duly taken place, and that all the requi- 

 site evidence had been obtained in England and from Italy and France, 

 as to the facts on the happening of which the United States were to 

 become entitled to the fund bequeathed by Mr, Smithson for the pur- 

 pose mentioned in his will. These facts 1 need not here repeat, being 

 already set forth specially in my No. 9, of the 25th of March, 1837. 



Overlooking a volume of matter merely technical in the evidence 

 and report, or now become immaterial to the main points, it will be 

 sufficient to say that it was satisfactorily established by the former 

 that Henry James Hungerford, named in the pleadings, was dead; 

 that he died at Pisa, in the summer of 1835; that he was not married 

 at the time of his death, nor at any time; and that he died childless. 

 It was not found how old he was at the time of his death; nor is that 

 material to any of the issues. As to John Fitall, it was found that he 

 died in London in June, 1834; and as to Madame de la Batut, the 

 mother of Henry James Hungerford, the master, on the evidence 

 before him, found her to have a claim on the estate of Mr. Smithson 

 to the amount of £150 9s. a year, payable as long as she lives, and for 

 the arrears of this annual allowance from the 22d of September, 1834, 

 to the 23d of last March. 



The establishment of all the foregoing facts will be found to meet 

 the essential inquiries to which the master's attention was directed by 

 the court's first decree, as reported in my No. 9. Mr. Smithson's will 

 having provided, among other things, that on the death of his nephew, 

 Henry James Hungerford, "without leaving child or children," the 

 whole of his property should go to the United States; and this primary 

 fact being now incontestably established in due and legal form under 

 the authorit}^ of the court, and all other proof required by the plead- 

 ings obtained, Mr. Pemberton asked for a decree declaring the United 

 States entitled to the property. The representative of the Attorne}^- 

 General, who was present in court, said that he believed everything 

 had been established, as stated, and that the rules relating to public 

 charities, as applicable to this case, calling for no objection on the part 

 of the Crown, none would be interposed — a course that falls in with 

 what was said by the same officer on the occasion of the first decree, 

 as reported in my No. 7. 



The counsel of the defendants. Messieurs Drummond, agreed also to 

 what was stated, and had nothing to allege in opposition to the claim 

 of the United States. 



The counsel of Madame de la Batut were also content; the course I 

 took, as made known in my No. 21, having put an end to opposition 

 from that quartei-. 



All essential facts ))oinsj- at lenyfth fullv and formally established, and 



