THE DISPUTED WILL CASE

Auckland Star, Volume XXVII, Issue 158, 7 July 1896, Page 2

THE DISPUTED WILL CASE

EDGCOMBB V. EDGGOMBE AND

OTHERS.

THE SUMMING UP.

Thb acbio» broughb by George Edgcombo to upteb the will of his late uncle, William Edgcombe, on the ground bbab the labfcer wos of unsound mind when the will was executed, was resumed ab the Supreme Coure this moraing before Hia Honor Mr Jußtico Conolly and a jury of twelve. Dr. Laishley and Mr Battley appeared for tho plaintiff; Mr Cooper (instructed by Mr B. VV. Bnrton) for the trustees (Flora Edgcombe and John Bollard) ; and Mr Cotter and Mr McGregor for Borne of the English beneficiaries. , The Courb waa occupied the whole of yesterday hearing tho addresses by counsel. Mr Cobter ooacluded his address at a quarter paab three, and Dr. Laishley »poke up to the adjournment. Hi« Honor, in summing up this morning, said there was only one quasbion which the jury would have to consider, and bhab was whether the testator wa» of sound mind at the time the will was mado, or whether, as Dr. Laishley had pub ib at the opening of the. caae, ho waa ef unsound mind ab thab time. In a legal point of view unsoundneas of mind was exactly the same as insanity. They would bear in mind blmb there was no perfect soundness of mind in any human being any more than there was perfect soundness of body. Ai a man grew old he naturally became unsound in body, and with regard to hia mind, his memory became lets bright; be had nob that appreciation of facts and capacity for business thab perhaps he formerly had, though he might, nevertheless, have bulßcienb soundness of mind to make a will. His Honor had been astonished ab hearing Dr. Laishley read from a case thab bbc highenb degree of soundness was required. He wan etill more astonished when he heard the authority quoted was Sir James Hannan. Tho sentimenb had somewhat) startled him, and whether Sir James Hunnan or any other authority had mode such a statement, that the hiekesb degree of aouaduess waa required in making a will, he would himself maintain that the degree of eoundnosu required was only such as to show thab the testator knew whab he was doing, knew who his relatives were, and had given due consideration bo the different bequests he was making in the will. The presumption of law waa thab a man was of sound mind until the contrary bad been proved. He knew ef a very startling case in which a man was tried for shooting at another with intonb to kill. The man was as mad ai any man could be to be ab large. , His friends engaged counsel for him, bub when tho latter stood up to cross-examine the first witness the prisoner objected to the solicitor appearing for him on the ground thab ib was Koiug to be contended that ho was a lunatic. The judge said of course he had to presume thab the man waa Bane, and so counsel bad to sib down and allow the pritoner to conducb his own crossexmination, the resulb being thab he was acquitted on bho ground of insanity. His Honor was present in Courb when the caeo was tried. The jury would have to babe into accounb also that Mr Bdgcombe was & very ignorant man ; that he wrote very bftdly indeed, and could keep accounts only in ouch a way thab no one could uuderb stand. They would alto take into aooounthe evidence of some of bho witnesses that up bo the time of the third marriage Mr Edgcombe was of intemperate habits, and therefore they might ask bhemselvtis if there wav no distiacb evidence one way or the other, whether he was noo, on tome of tho occasions referred to by some of bho witnesses, the worso for drink., There was.no doubt thab frequently when he came into town his mind was stupefied by drink. They might take that into account in considering the Necessity thcro was for some assistance being given him in conducting his business. His Honor now referred to the two wills, the one made in March, 1890, while the testator was marriod to his second wite, and the other in August, 1892, the aubjocb of the present action. He pointed out that both were very elaborate wills, providing for a great number of persons. Both of them were unlike an ordinary will, or the majority of disputed wills which had passed through His Honor's hands, and in which the evidence had usually gono to show that the testator had boon so very illiterate that he had just managed to writo down whab he desired to leave to somebody. Here, however, was an elaborate will showing careful consideration on tho parb of somebody as to wtmb tho Various bequests should be. If tho jury wore satisfied ib was tho will of the deceased and no part of it was prompted by sny ofcher ponon ib would no doubb appear to ti'iom thab there, was nothing irrational. Still, there were two matters which required explanation. For instance, the testator lefb Mount. Edgcombe to his wife during her lifetime, and to another person when he attained the age of 21 year?. It was singular, too, that there waa no evidence as to what age thab other person wsa. Bia Honor conoidered that was certainly an inconsistent provision in the will. The other instance was a provision bhab the daughter of the testator's brother received an annuity of £10 a year, which was to cease on the death of her father. - According to the instructions, he noticed that the annuity was to be paid to the daughter through the father. However, the father died and the annuity ceased, although there was no evidence to show that the daughter was provided for in any other way. In His Honor's opinion it was a peculiar provision thab the annuity to the daughter should cease on the death df her father. With these exceptions, he thought) the jury would see thab the will, if it was tho will of the testator, showed a considerable amount of considering on hie part, and waa not thab of. a man who, as some of the witnesses had sworn, was perfectly childish ab the time thab ib was made. His Honor then proceeded to go over tho whole of the 'evidence, and make comments on it. He reminded the jury they "were not bound to be guided by his common ts, and he assured then thab he would refrain from expressing hie opinion on the question which they would have to consider. Hia Honor proceeded to read the evidence of the 27 witnesses who had given evidence.

WNIINUED ON PAGE 5.