THE COADY BUCKLEY WILL CASE.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume XXXII, Issue 186, 10 December 1873, Page 1 (Supplement)

THE COADY BUCKLEY WILL CASE.

[From the Braidwood Dispatch^] The commission sent from tho Supreme Court in Melbourne to inquiro into certain matter? relating to tlie genuineness of the will of the late P. (J. Buekley in favour of Thomas Maher, arrir«d in Braidwood on Thursday last. Mr. Ellis, the UnderSherilFof tho Court conducts the inquiry, assisted by Mr. Wilkes, solicitor — another Melbourne solicitor, Mr. Vaughan, being permitted to accompany these gentlemen on behalf of the claimant, and cross-examine witnesses. TII9 commission commenced their inquiry yesterday, and examined several witnesses. The date of the will for which pro* buto has been moved is as far back as 1842, and < the commission have with them a fat-simile of the document in the shape of a photograph, which we have courteously been allowed to have a look at, and which is a curiosity in its way. The testator was staying at tho time of signing the will at Boloca Creek, Monaro, at Matter's house. In a former issue we published the report of the evidence of the claimant when moving for probate of the will. He stated that it was written by a storeman at testa- ' tator's father-in-law's, who owned the ' neighbouring station. This man's name was Hennessy, and he was known as Hopping Jim, on account of his being lame. The testator calied at claimant's place with Hennessy, one Thomas Farrell, and Patrick Keighrow, and said he wanted his ' will drawn, he having fallen aub with his father-in-law, and having resolved to go to Q-ipp9 Land with ! a mob of cattle to form a station. He said he was afraid he would be killed by the blacks, who were ' very troublesome. The will, claimant alleges, waß then drawn up at testator's dictation, and signed by him in presence of Thomas Farrell, John Mcliolls, Keighrow, claimant, nnd his wife. The G-overn- , ment of Victoria are contesting the will as a fo'gsry, but it is not intended thereby, as it cannot be, to dispute tho rightß of the next of kin, to which there have been some seven or eight claimants already. Altogether the case is a most romantic one. Maher, in his evidence, already referred to, states that when the will was signed he kept it in his house till he I went to South Australia in 1847 overland, during which period it had been with other papers damaged by a flood entering the house. He then sent it with other papers to John M'Guigan's ' his brother-in-law's at Jingera, where they remained till ho (Maher) again took possession of them in 1884, and lelt them at' Peter Curley's, at Molonglo, intending to return for them on his return from Sydney, where he was going, but lie went home by a different road, and he never saw the will again until last May, when he got it through Mr. Agnew, of Numeralia, through the post, with a letter from Pe\er Curley, dated 15th December, 1872, intimating that the will was forwarded lor him (Mallei). Claimant Bays he wrote to William Buckley (testator), but received no answer, aud thought no more about it, supposing he had made another will, until he got a letter from the proprietors of the Monaro Mercury mloi using him that there was no other will, and that the Grovernmeut were going to take the property, and relerring to the will in Mr. Agnew's possession. Such is a brief sketch of this remarkable case, all the incidents of which, have occurred in this and the neighbouring districts, and it is to test the truth of these statements that the Commission has been sent here.