OLD CAPE'S WILL

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 49, 26 August 1922, Page 11

OLD CAPE'S WILL

.' " In. my judgment, only the DDchart table would jm«i judgment on \t her,"Job* served Mr. Justice Adams at the Christchurch. Supreme Court, ifa upholding th« very much contested will of en old Ifdy. 'Mrs. Rachael Willis. ■'• 'r^-A :..;.- -:';■. '■.--: Mrs. Willis hid cut her «x sou out of ; participation in her estate,:. and had left the whole of it to her two daughters, the greater part, going: to one daughter* who had looked after W in her old age. The will had been contacted by -faor of the six sons, wto dlsgad* that tha testatrix did not possess testamentary; capacity, and that he was subjected to undue influence on the part of the daughter referred to. The hearing had occu-.pied-four day*.1 ■„..■?■ ■;,:'.'■;-:■'■■•■: . ■J:'::'-:'-.:Z-.>. After reviewing the SvfiftnM ia. df tail, his, Honour said: '-' Ombml lor thft caveators [four of the soosV ia opening, put the case for nndiw iamieaoe upon the groiinds that the testatrix and W sons had never ' lost their affection: for each other, but that she had been pr«etically forced to make the,wills of 1817 and 1919; that the defendant, by threat* and other improper means, had obtained a dominating influence over the.testatri*, who was afraid, to meet bar sons in tM defendant's presence; that the defendant) had received letters sent by her brothers to the testatrix, and either prevented her from replying or dictated the replies; thai the defendant had poisoned the mind of the testatrix against the caveators and other members of the family, and kept her" from having any private communications with them./ Under examination by their counsel, the'evidence of the caveators, in the main, supported' counsel's opening, but their admission* -on crocs-examination' and• the' 'documentary evidence.present so many inconsistencies in' essential: details that it would. be difficult' to accept the other, portions of their 4 story,' even ;in;the'.abseno6.ol evidence in support of the will, other than that' of the attesting witnesses.' ". "It is scarcely creditable that th« letten and-documents to, which.l hayis re--ferred could have'beea dictated by filial affection or influenced by that respeotfal conaideTation which is' due from a sen to a mother of considerable"' age and! physically infirm, who, according to their own .account, retaiiied.'.all., her maternal- affection foe them. Upoti th» whole of: the evidence I am 'abundantly satisfied that;during tbe'last few yean of her life she h«dbeoonie bo dissatisfied with the conduct of b*r eon* thai' she no longer desired their visits, sad that it was by her wish-that the defendant end»*voured trkcep them apart. However much an eetraoraMnt between parent and child is to be'deplored, I think it only right to say that, in my judgment, oily the uncharitabls would .pass judgment upon het>.; The'wiß iteetf isa Teaeowble-and jv^wfll, >TJ» jit- ■ fendant; devoted .'her- life to ' the 'ssrvie* ' of. the testatrix';' according to t&e, testimony, of .those tcell; able to. jndge,: ah* has been a- faithful dwgbtaritnd devoted nurse. AH the sons were oot in tf*« world,' attendittg to :their ,o*m affairs; and, while evincing a keen d«ire to control and prc+ect U» paternal esUte, in the rewersioollpf. whichJlUiiey; _we*e_ entitled to share undw t*e will of U» deceased husband and father, rendered tha testatrix no loving or compassionate service. Her estate i« not large, and sh« bestowed it upon -her daughters^-"aewrßV ing ,to;their^ dSiarts, as tiiose deserts appeared ( .tocher.' / .''. : v^...;■{, ..-;v..■:.',.!._.. v;^ . ■'-:Hw'--Hononr'. upheld r the ;,,-W»ni' h ,*JP^. granted probate in aolean form (l«parts th« "Sun;1). The cayeator* we« cwiered | te'-paj^tha^osta...,;.;;^.^..;,;^;.^';:..:..^,^;. :-