Third daughter, Mrs Elizabeth di Villa was bequeathed £10 in her mother's Will (1884), receiving also a small gold brooch with a light red stone.
In Sep 1893 Elizabth Manso di Villa, widow, was granted probate of her husband's personal estate, valued at £16,424 2s.
In 1901 Elizabeth M di Villa, age 50, widow, born in Brighton Sussex, living on her own means, was living in Bexhill Sussex. With her were children: Linda M. M., age 22, born in Brighton, Martin F. M., age 21, born in France, cycle maker & dealer, Helen M. M., age 20, born in France, Katherine M, age 16, born in Brighton, Elizabeth G. M., age 15, born in Hassocks Sussex, Emile J. M., age 11, born in Belgium. Marie T. M., age 14, born in Belgium.
--------------------------------
A COMPLICATED CASE
"Sturmey Archer Gears, Ltd. v. Elizabeth Manso di Villa." Plaintiffs claimed £10 7s. 6d. for goods sold and delivered.
Mr. A. Atkinson appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Rowland Harker (instructed by Messrs. Holmes, Borluse and Johnson, Brighton) represented Mrs. di Villa, and Mr. De Wet the other defendant.
Mr. Atkinson said the case would decide finally whether the business at Rendezvous Street by Mr. di Villa or his mother.
Mr. H. M. Humphreys, cashier, in the employ of the plaintiffs, and residing at Nottingham, said the orders (produced) to his firm were written by Mr. di Villa, the son of the other defendant. The goods were duly supplied and delivered. They had not been paid for them yet, either by the mother or son. They were booked to F. M. di Villa, and they did not know whether the mother or the son was the owner. F. M. di Villa never wrote to them that he could not pay, and he did not inform them of his bankruptcy. The plaintiff's debt was not scheduled in his statement.
Cross-examined, witness said the first transaction was on March 29th, 1909, when cash was paid.
Mr. H. H. Barton, the trustee in bankruptcy of Mr. di Villa's estate, said he received a summary of the statement of affairs in connection with the bankruptcy of Mr. di Villa. He saw Mr. di Villa several times, but he did not take possession of any of the book debts or goods at 30, Rendezvous Street. The plaintiffs did not prove their debt in connection with the bankruptcy proceedings. There was a deed of assignment given by Mr. di Villa to a trustee (Mr. Bullock) previously, so they could not take the goods.
Cross-examined, Mr. Barton said the deed of assignment was made in 1905. During his investigations he ascertained that if he paid the solicitors' costs and Mr. Bullock's costs as far as he was concerned he would not have a [word faded] on the property at all. There was no money in the estate to pay the costs. The man was made bankrupt in connection with a coal business at Dover in the name of a man named Lawrence. He found that Mrs. di Villa had lent money to her son on several occasions, and she proved for £1,300 in her son's bankruptcy, receiving her dividend of five-eighths of a penny in the £ on that amount.
Felix Martin di Villa, one of the defendants, said he commenced business in Rendezvous Street, in 1900, on a yearly agreement. He was now in occupation of the premises. He was in difficulties in 1905, and he executed a deed of assignment in favour of his creditors. The deed purported to include all he had got. The trustee left him in possession as manager, presumably for the trustee because sooner or later he understood it would be transferred to his mother. No one became tenant of the premises but himself. From 1905 to 1909 he could not remember making a representation to anyone that he was only the manager of the business. He did not tell anyone that his mother owned the business, but he did inform different people that it could be transferred to her at any time. He was made bankrupt in 1909. The name over the shop was M. di Villa, and it might stand for his wife. The "F" originally in front of it had been left out accidentally when the re-painting of the premises took place a short time ago. He could not remember that he told the Official Receiver that since the deed of assignment he had managed the business for his mother. He did not tell the Official Receiver that his mother had taken over the business, but he presumed that was a mistake in the shorthand writer's.
Cross-examined, witness said that his mother had frequently supplied him with sums of money to get him out of difficulties. He had not rendered any accounts to his mother.
His Honour said it must be proved that the male defendant was carrying on the business for his mother, and that she was the principal. The case was an extremely difficult one, because he was not disposed to attach too much importance to Mr. di Villa's evidence. He had seen a good deal of him one way and another. The difficulty was that he denied that he made any representation.
Mrs. di Villa was called by his Honour and in answer to him, she said she knew her son made a composition with his creditors in 1905. He was certainly not carrying on the business for her, and she had no interest whatever in it. He never came to her for his sales and purchases. He never paid her over any of his takings at all. She never authorised him to buy goods on her account.
In reply to Mr. Atkinson, she said she never expected to get anything out of the business. The name over the shop did not refer to her.
His Honour said he must give judgment for Mrs. di Villa, and he also gave judgment for the son, but without costs. He considered it was a very hard case. He saw no ground on which he ought to punish the lady.
Folkestone Express, Sandgate, Shorncliffe & Hythe Advertiser, 1 October 1910, p. 7
--------------------------------
In 1911 Elizabeth Manso di Villa, age 61, widow, born in Brighton Sussex, was visiting Catherine Pearson at 27 Benson Rd., Forest Hill, Lewisham, London.
--------------------------------
Elizabeth M di Villa died aged 63 years. 2
Elizabeth Manso di Villa of Castle Hedingham Essex, widow, died 28 December 1913. Probate London 7 February 1914 to Charles Villiers Johnson, solicitor. Effects £856 16s. 1d. 3
Research Notes: