WHICH IS THE BETTER WILL?

Manawatu Times, Volume LV, Issue 7411, 19 December 1930, Page 7

WHICH IS THE BETTER WILL?

Betty Hunter’s Interest

DEFENDING COUNSEL OPENS CASE

HIS HONOUR’S INTERJECTIONS

Per Pres 3 Association. WELLINGTON, Last Night,

The Sir George Hunter will case was continued in the Supreme Court to-day. Daniel George Arthur Cooper, formerly registrar of the Supremo Court and afterwards a Stipendiary Magistrate, said he saw Sir George Hunter last August, when he spoke quite cleaily and his face seemed the samo as wi • ness.had always known it. Recalled, Alexander Dunn, barristo and solicitor, produced a file of letters from Messrs. Bcthuuc and Hunter s letter-book, which was forwarded to Percy Hunter in connection,; with bn George’s affairs between October 8, 1929, and Juno 17, 1930. Tho letters were based on conversations ho had had with Sir George. Witness said Sir George’s power of doing business was the same after the stroke as before it. His whole manner was the same ancl he required no prompting. Mr. Justico Reed said he regarded the letters as very important. _ . Replying to his Honour, witness said Sir George appreciated that the Government’s super-tax would affect him considerably. In fact, Sir George s ease had been quoted m Parliame t. Dr. Thwigg said that providing his affairs were not too intricate and providing that he had some assistance, it was possible that Sir George un could have made a will within two weeks of his stroke. There were no definite tests for testamentary capacity laid down as far as witness knew. Ono judged cases on general lines and it was usual to .satisfy oneself as to a patient’s soundness of mind. ln cx ‘ tensive paralysis due to apoplexy there was usually general mental impairment, but. not always. It was quite possible to have a paralysis case that had nothing to do with the brain. Thor had been nothing in the history of Sir George’s case that gave him tho impression that the stroke had been

severe. This concluded plaintiffs case. Lady Hunter’s Case

Mr. Watson, in Ms opening address, said that Lady Hunter had only decided to lodge the caveat that hao caused the present action after full inquiries had been made from people who were thought to be competent to say that Sir George had no testamentary capacity—Drs. Steele and Gicsen, the attending doctor and consulting doctor respectively—as a result of a long interview with them, and the evidence woulc show that at tho time both Dr. Steele and Dr. Gicsen v/erc emphatic that Sir George at no time before his departure to Botorua had had any testamentary capacity. Included in Dr. Gicsen s evidence would bo certain evidence dealing with Dr. Steele’s previous actions and utterances as to Sir George’s testamentary capacity. Lady Hunter, as a result of the evidence gained at this conference, had decided to contest the granting of probate. Lady Hunter s attitude in contesting the wills did not arise from any complaint of her treatnient. She had taken action for the interest and benefit of her child, Betty. His Honour: But the child takes nothing under the 1924 will. Mr. Watson: Ultimately she will take everything. She has a reversionary interest. His Honour: She gets nothing in toe meantime. Lady Hunter is a young woman and the girl takes no interest until her death or her re-marriage. It s a very different position under the last will.

Mr. Watson said Lady Hunter wa» trying to ensure that the wishes of Sir George, made before his illness, would be given effect to. She had had nothing to do with the October will, counsel said, and had entirely disapproved of the will-making at that time. His Honour: Can you point out any unfairness in the October will? Mr. Watson: In its unexplained and sudden cutting down of the child's interests. Mr. Watson proceeded to compare the provisions made for the child in the three wills and went on to say that it was suggested that the estate was not worth the value it was said to lie until all the annuities-had come back into the estate on the deaths of the people to whom they were paid, thus making the annuity fund available for the estate. If it was a fact that there would be no income from the estate until the annuities' and other charges had fallen back in the residue, then counsel contended that the child vns not a whit better off under the 19-9 will than under the 1924 will, on which Lady Hunter asked for the Court s pronouncement.