A TASMANIAN WILL CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 219, 21 September 1870, Page 2

A TASMANIAN WILL CASE.

A TEtEGEAM to the Arrjiis states time in the Supreme Court (in Banco), on Friday, his Honor the Chief Justice gave judgment in the celebrated will c&sc, Rogers t. Espie. It was a testamentary suit heard in last term, and the Court was crowded on the occasion of the delivery of judgment. The testator had bequeathed £1500 to his wife, whom he had married on his death-bed, and only a fewhours before his death, she having previously been his housekeeper and attendant during his illness. He had also left £1000 to the Roman Catholic bishop for general religious purpose?, £400 to a brother, £200 to a sister, both of whom reside in .England, nnd left his wife to be the residuary legatee. The brother, who lives in Manchester, disputed the will, on the ground that the testator was of unsound mind, and that undue influence had been brought to bear upon him by the priest who had attended him in his last moments. His Honor said the circumstances were such as to warrant suspicion until all the facts came to be enquired into and explained. The evidence of Dr. Crowther and Dr. Brooke went to show that they thought the deceased had pneumonia, and was in a semi-comatose state before the will was signed ; and on their statements" and opinions other medical witnesses bused opinions, some favourable and some adverse, to the testator's mental capacity. His Honor considered the evidence of the Rev. Father Sheehy and Mr. JBennisun, solicitor, supplied the kind of proof of capacity which the rules of the Court required—if that evidence wns truo, and for various reasons his Honor thought it could not be considered otherwise than true. He was further of opinion that the account of undue influence was not established. After an able and exhaustive dealing with the evidence, medical and otherwise, his Honor sustained the will; the costs of both sides to be paid out of the estate. The reading of the judgment occupied one hour and a half. Mr. Justice Dobson, who, before his elevation to the bench, had been one of the counsel engaged in the case, took no parb in the proceedings beyond stating that he simply adopted the Chief Justice's judgment, which would, therefore, be taken as the judgment of the Court.