TENSE INCIDENTS IN WILL CASE

NZ Truth, Issue 1306, 22 December 1930, Page 5

TENSE INCIDENTS IN WILL CASE

Late Sir George Hunter's Medical Adviser, Dr. Steele, Subjected To Lengthy Cross-examination PROTRACTED LEG^ITbATTLE ADJOURNED (From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Wellington Representative.) iiHiiiiiii«iiiiiiiii»HiHiiiiiiiii!iiiiiiKiiiiiiiiiitf|iiiiHiitHiiiniiiiiti«iiiinwiiHtiiiiiiii«iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii*«iMimHttfMtiii« iiiii'uiie • ' [ Dominating the closing '-stages of the case for the plaintirTs"in the interesting and protracted legal bat- j J " tie m progress over the question of the late Sir George Hunter's last will and testament, was the evidence of Dr. § ] Hughes Steele, medical adviser to the deceased knight, and; the lengthy cross-exammation to which he was sub- | I jected by Mr. G. G. Watson, counsel for Lady Hunter. , § | Opposing probate of the will, one of her main grounds being that her late husband was of unsound § j mind and memory when he executed this important document, Lady Hunter's case was opened by her counsel, ] | and, after certain evidence was given, the proceedings were adjourned until after the Law recess. j

MR. 'A. GRAY, K.C., and with him Mr. W. IST. Matthews, appeared for . the plaintiffs, Cyril Paul and Thomas Percy Hunter, who are applying for probate, and Mr. G. G. Watson, with. him Mr/ H. J. V. James, opposed the application on behalf of Lady Hunter. Mr. W; Perry appeared for Betty Hunter, the child of the marriage. When Dr. Steele took the stand again for cross-examination, Mr. Watson further questioned him regarding his alleged views on Sir George Hunter's condition ; given at the conference prior to the' case. At this conference, there was ; present^ the three doctors concerned, Drs. : Steele, Giesen and McDonald, • and counsel for Lady Hunter, Messrs. 'Watson and Janies. NAfter the conference, Mr. Watson ~ forwarded to Dr. Steele a report of the views expressed by the doctor, •with a request'; that he make any necessary correctiqns and sign the statement This Dr. Steele did, but wrien the document was produced m court, Mr. Watson's cross-examina-tion was directed to show that it differed considerably from the views expressed by Dr. Steele m his evi-dence-in-chief. . Before proceeding: to detail, Dr. * Steele^made a statement from the box concerning the report and the con- ,- ference from which it originated. He said that at this conference most, of the discussion concerned the testa- + mentary capacity of Sir George Hunter, and also dealt with the legal interpretation of the phrase, "to make"'. a - will, which is included m the attestation form signed by the doctor and forming part of the will. At the time of the conference, said the doctor, he was under the impression from the bulk of the document, that Sir George had made a complicated will, but he was also perfectly satisfied m his own mind, that Sir George was capable of testamentary capacity under the circumstances and conditions obtaining. At the same time, however, he t was not quite sure of the legal position with regard to a man m k Sir George's condition: I That was, whether Sir George would fe have had to make his will without the U help of someone who was conversant f with his aft;air.s.-'and who knew how £ he proposed to dispose of. his property. I Mr. Watson: What was your reason | for having 'so many interviews with ' the plaintiff's solicitor ?^-Because of Dr. Gies'6n.'s ; statement; ; Then you are chiefly concerned with supporting your statement in' the attestation' form? — No. Aren't you concerned with that at all? — No, I am concerned with the truth. .Do you know anything about a letter to Nurse West suggesting that she should see you before she saw the „ plaintiff's solicitors ?— -No, I do not. Wk Dr. Steele said that he had dis■cussed the case with H'almost everyone here." • D Mr. Watson then proceeded to go Hthrough Dr. Steele's statement taken j at the conference, and questioned him V on various points arising from it. The doctor said that he still adhered to his statement that the first possible date on which Sir George was mentally and physically capable of signing a will, knowing that he was doing so, was October 12. He also ■ adhered to his statement that prior to that date there would have been grave doubts as to Sir George's knowledge of the nature of the act he was performing. His Honor: What do you actually mean by "prior to"? Do you mean that there would have been grave doubts about his understanding that he was actually signing a document which was his will, or do you mean that he would be unable to under- ' stand the effect of his will? Witness: He would not be able to appreciafcs fully the sigming of the will_ and the"ffects of the will. To a further question, witness agreed that prior to October 12 there would have been grave doubts about the patient understanding the nature of the act he was performing. His Honor: What do you mean by "the nature of the act"? Mr. Watson: Yes, that's what we want to know. Dr. Steele: Knowing that he was signing his ' will and what were its contents. Asked whether he still adhered to his statement that he had not contemplated the; possibility that Sir George was making a new disposal of his property, the witness said that he had never contemplated this, and that he would not have given his certificate had he i done so. ■' "I thought he' was signing a will, instructions for which had been given before his illness, or making a few trivial alterations," he added. Mr. Watson: Did you, m fact, make a remark to Mr. Dunn, "I hope you haven't given him all' that at one pop"? — Yes. And that Mi*. Dunn replied that he had read it bit by bit?— Yes. Then if Mr. Dunn says that he read the will .all at once, he is wrong? — I don't know what Mr. Dunn says. Replying to further questions, Dr. Steele said that Sir George would * have been incapable of disposing of a large estate without the assistance of Mr. Dunn, his- man of affairs. Another statement which the doctor acknowledged, was one to the effect that if the will of November was materially or grossly different from that of October, Sir George "could not have done it." Mr. Watson: The words "could not have done it," are your ,own precise words, are they not? — Yes. Did you mean by that that Sir i George did not have the capacity^ to make a gross or material change m the disposition of his property? —Yes, if the change required extensive thought. Sentence by sentence, Dr. Steele's statement was' examined until Mr. Watson closed this portion of his examination by extending the doctor the opportunity to make any further a-lterations which he desired. The offer was refused. Mr. Watson: Is it not a fact that about September 30, you, told Lady Sunter that it waa by no means cer-

tain that Sir George would survive? — No, Lady Hunter must have misunderstood me. You would disagree if Dr. Giesen says that you said you had grave doubts whether Sir George would survive? — Yes, I would. ■-■ . . i You were' by no means optimistic i of his future at that time? — No /one [ could be. At this stage the cross-examination developed into, a medico legal discussion concerning the peculiarities of apoplexy and its effect on the patient. Weighty tomes' were produced by both sides, and at times the • question, and cross-question barrage grew very brisk indeed. . This was particularly the case when the examination 'proceeded to the negotiations which took place concerning the certificates .of the deceased ! j knight's testamentary capacity given I Iby Dr. Giesen at the request of Dr.] I Steele m /order that the latter might have an independent opinion. Mr. Watson: Is it not right that when you got the certificate you rang j

up Dr. Giesen and said, "That will not do Dunn"? — Oh, my God, no. That is a deliberate lie. If Dr. Giesen says that, you suggest I he is a deliberate liar? — I would not I say that he is a liar. I would say that it is a deliberate, lie. ■ Mr. Watson remarked that Dr. Giesen's certificate was to the effect that although Sir' George Hunter was not able to understand, business, he was able to understand that he was signing his will. , • This announcement invoked a protest from the witness that he- . had - never seen Dr. Giesen's certificate, but that he would not I have dreamed of allowing the ; signing of the will to proceed, if I he had not received the "all correct" from, his brother medico. j "Do you suggest that I did all this | off my own bat?" he asked Mr. Wat- j son heatedly. Mr. Watson: This is another point j on which you and Dr. Giesen .will i violently differ. . I "It sounds like it," remarked the! doctor with a shrug, when Mr. Wat- j son asked him whether he suggested that - Dr. Giesen had "made up" a statement that the witness had asked him for a certificate because he said' there would certainly be trouble about the will. Mr. Watson: Do you suggest that Dr. Giesen is fabricating his evidence? — No. But Dr. Giesen is m v an awkward position. . Dr. Giesen is m an awkward position, did you say?— Well, he gave a| certificate that Sir Geoi-ge Hunter was. fit. . ' '•' . . "Dr. Giesen is one of the finest men I have ever met," replied the witness

half-a-dozen times by Dr. Giesen and myself? — Not six times. — Well, several times. I put it to you that at the time of the conference you did not even know what, testamentary capacity meant? — Nonsense. The average person has a fairly sound idea of it. Shall we put it then that you knew as much about it as the man m the street? — I knew more. Are you suggesting to me that I do not know my job? •■ ' • i Mr. Watson: I am suggesting to you-that you did not' know what testamentary capacity was. Mr. Watson: Do you say that it is nonsense to suggest that Sir George had no testamentary capacity at'Rotorua?—Yes. ■And if Dr. Duncan says that he is positive that he had none? — Dr. Hayes says otherwise. , Do you characterise what Dr. Duncan says as nonsense? — No, but I characterise what Dr. Hayes says as sense. And what Dr. Duncan says as nonsense?— They can't both be right. Have you had any previous experience of judging a man's testamentary capacity for will making? — No. Then you don't know what are* the recognised tests that a doctor should apply? — Oh, nonsense!' Of course I do. What are they? — I have told you. Do you know the recognised teats that a doctor applies? — I cannot remember them now. I would have to read them up. But you. should not have to read them up. If you were called on m the lunch hour, to determine a man's testamentary capacity, could you do it?— l should- probably have to look up my authorities. So you do not know the tests for testamentary capacity? — I would have to read them up. Did you apply any tests to Sir George Hunter? — I did not have to. I saw him every day. Questioned regarding the methods which he used to ascertain the testamentary capacity of his patient, the doctor said that although he did not apply definite' tests, he ascertained during the course of his ordinary conversation with Sir George, that he had this capacity.- ■■••■' "I say definitely and emphatically that Sir George had no mental impairment," he reiterated when pressed, on this point. v Mr. Watson: Have you, on any previous occasion, been asked to express an opinion on a sick man's testamentary capacity? — Sick man, no. To Mr. Gray witness emphatically , denied ; that he had changed his views upon Sir George's testamentary capacity. He never had had any doubt, and he had none now that, under the circumstances and conditions obtaining at the time. Sir George Hunter had; the necessary testamentary capacity. After several hours occupied m giving his evidence, Dr. Steele left the box. He was briefly recalled, when his day book was brought into court and he was able to inform Mr. Watson that he had received seven visits from the plaintiff's solicitor, Mr, Dunn, between October, 1929, and June, J930. Dr. J. H. Graham Robertson, mcdi- ' cal practitioner, of Wellington, was the next witness. He said he had had some experience of mental work, and ' had at one time been stationed at Ppfi- - rua Mental "Hosp.ital. His acquaintanceship with the late Sir George Hunter went back over a period of 10 years. . • On February 18, of this year, at the request of Dr. Steele, he was called m to see Sir George regarding some skin treatment. He found Sir* George looking very frail and weak, and he '. had formed the opinion that he could be easily exhausted. "There was nothing m his mental reactions m our ' Conversation

r fore his death, and conversed with him. Sir George seemed quite bright and well. . Sir George's legal adviser, Alexander Dunn, recalled, described various instructions given to him by Sir George, and produced letters supporting these.' In one case, Mr. Dunn described enauiries made by Sir George concerning the payment of the yearly bonus to his hands. Sir George had expressed concern that this matter should not be overlooked by Mr. Percy Hunter, and had instructed the witness to make inquiries m this connection. I Other letters produced contained re- I ports by Mr. Dunn regarding Sir George's health — the witness said that he had based these reports on telephone . communications from Lady Hunter and his own observations. After some further examination concerning the letters, Mr. Watson asked permission of the court to re-examine the witness on several points which had arisen since his evidence-in-chief. His Honor: What I think I should be satisfied of is this. What was the position with regard to Dr. Giesen on the morning that the will was signed? — That he was thoroughly satisfied, after making an examination the previous day, that Sir George was competent to make a will. His Honor: From whom did you get that information? — From Lady Hunter. I want to be quite, clear about it. Is there any doubt that Lady Hunter told you the testator was m a fit condition to make a will?— There is no doubt about it. Mr. Dunn could not remember when Lady Hunter told him this. . Mr. Watson: When did Dr. Steele tell you his version of the result of Dr. Giesen's examination? — It must have been on the Saturday morning when he called to attest the -will. His Honor: My desire is to be informed whether you were informed that Dr. Giesen had agreed that this testator was m a fit condition to make a will. Please be as. definite as you can?— l cannot recollect, your Honor. His Honor: Are you quite, clear on this point, that it .was you who suggested an examination by Dr. Giesen?