AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13482, 5 July 1907, Page 7

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT

"f& BOLE WILL CASE.. EVIDENCE OF MENTAL CAPACITY. <.„ of Edward Kule and Grace Isu- ?!? Rule v. John Rule", in which a second 156 • Jin dispute, was continued at the • Cod V ■ /Supremo Court, before Mr. Jus- • yesterday morning. The . "° , ~«■ the codicil in question was to cffC l v beq«« to the defendant of a ■ ie in the estate of the late Mrs. Grace '.> 110056 " live it to Grace Elizabeth Rule • °° X ", t he plaintiffs). Defendant resisted ' rcodSQn the grounds that on the ' 5 I of Us issuance the testatrix was not ..11* in a condition to administer her m ! n ! Ld that undue influence had been PSt " m to bear on her. On Wednesday bl 'ltevas adduced by plaintiffs to show -£ft tatrix was of sound intellect at time the codicil was made out, and l ldTy defendant called witnesses to y ( Wish his contention that testatrix at ' *J"» time was not strong mentally. ' : ,, a «rs Newton and Endean appeared for SS--d Messr, Reed and Prende, last for defendant. ' % ne Elizabeth Watkins, who said she • J known testatrix from 1901 and had - ' -Stod her frequently up to. within 18 v VL. of her death, gave it as Iter opinion '-''-' Testatrix in 1902 was not sufficiently " Elementally to make a will. While at ' -Sesshe spoke rationally, it frequently ' 'Sued that she rambled in conversation, . ■■" TC«- how defective was. her memory. then also in bad health Witness "u J heard testatrix on several occasions , ?JSi the subject of her property and f, m she had made, saying that one ■"house was for her son John and the other fr "Ted" Subsequently witness ceased her visits" because conversation with her was not interesting. Replying to Mr. Newton, '■ witness said that during the whole time she had visited testatrix she ..'was too childish to carry on a conversa"isabel Kempwell, step-grand-daughter of '-' testatrix, who had known the latter for a "period of 22 years, said she had noticed ' ' a great change in the mental condition of 'testatrix some seven years ago. Her condition got worse after that, and showed ■ r hopeless lapse of memory, causing witness .'I to- curtail her visits. .' ■ . ' , \ •V~ John Rule, jun., son of the defendant, /gave evidence as to testatrix's failing memory and eccentric behaviour. • ■/-Michael Reardon, a neighbour of the tes- • ' ■' tutrix for 16 years, deposed to instances of forget fulness," but said testatrix seemed to listen intelligently to the conversation go-

: . inc on. ••...-' Jessie Dobbs, who had known testatrix for about 13 years,. said that in 1902 she was frail and weak, and during the one ■ .'visit referred several times to witness "".child, who had been dead then about five -v years, of which fact testatrix was well "aware. She called on Mrs. Cox un two * .occasions in 1902. Mrs. Cox knew witness when she saw her. Mary Ann Rule, wife of defendant, said '" she knew Mrs. Cox for 42 \enrs, and.. ' except for a brief interval after Mrs. '/Cox's illness, was on most intimate terms with her.' Shortly after the erection, of the houses witness assisted Mrs.. Cox into one of them. Mrs. Cox asked witness to choose one of the houses, and she expressed * • a desire for the one overlooking the sea. -' . She always referred to the place as '.'V,.; "Johnny's liousj." About thiee months before slrs. Cox died witness suggested ' to Mrs. Cox that she should go into another 7 " room and be more comfortable, to which j ■•■ the deceased replied: "1 won't be long. '" Johnny will soon have the house." ■ • '. Ettie Rule, a married woman residing in '■■ Jchn-street, Pohsonby, and a daughter-in- '.- law of Mrs. Mary Ann Rule, said that she ' ' first saw Mrs.- Cox in 1901. Mrs Cox . could not converse with witness intelhgent- . To Mr. Endean: There was nothing . "strange about Mrs. Cox's, actions. " Tins concluded the evidence, and the - Court thereupon.adjourned until to-day. j