A DISPUTED WILL.

Taranaki Daily News, 25 August 1921, Page 6

A DISPUTED WILL.

ACTION IN SUPREME COURT. * REVOCATION OF PROBATE SOUGHT. I FURTHER EVIDENCE. A full day was occupied in the “Supreme Coiu-t, New Plymouth, yesterday, with the 1 continuation of the hearing of the claim •made by Mary M. Brockett (of Melbourne), and T. Randerson (of Rotorua), against James Byrne and John William Willis, both of Kapuni, for revocation of the probate of the will of John Willis on the grounds that the testator was not of .sound mind when the will was made. Considerable medical opinion had been heard the previous day on the question of whether or not the late John Willis was menially deficient for some time prior to making the will. Edwin Wright, who had been called on behalf of the plaintiffs, said that among the changes he noticed in Willis of recent years was disregard of his personal appearance. While, formerly, he had been particular in this respect, he became careless, and appeared unwashed, and, to some extent, unkempt. He had an obsession that there were a crowd of men on the -back of his farm digging up potatoes and peltiug each other with /them. As a matter of fact, there was no land cultivated on the back of the farm. Mr. Quilliam: How is it that you did not tell us these things yesterday?—They were not in my mind at the time; I have since thought things over. Is it not possible that on the occasion of the brother’s funeral you misunderstood what Willis said, and that he was referring to some other grave?—No, we were standing right alongside. Can you suggest anyone who should re ceive a benefit under the will, and wh-' has been omitted?—Yes, two nephews in Australia.

MORE MEDICAL TESTIMONY. Dr. W. M. Thomson (Hawera) deposed to accompanying Dr. McDiarmid to Kapuni in February, 1916; others of the party included Mr. O’Dea and a Mr. Thrush. They proceeded to Willis’ farm. After the car had pulled up they saw old Mr. Willis standing behind a boxthorn hedge, as if in hiding. He gave the party some information about a sister named “Maggie,” whom he described ns “alive and kicking.” The party were told by Thrush (hat this sister was dead. Willis

the land himself with some little brothers, and that one of these was nine years old. The conversation then turned on the war, and he said that fighting had taken, place between the bridge and the store, between the persons who went to church and the Sunday school people. Willis was no doubt suffering from softening of the

brain, and witness would have been prepared to certify him insane that day if necessary, but the old man was harmless. From the state in which Willis was this must have been coming on for a couple of years at least. It was very highly improbable from Willis’ condition then that three months before he would have been in a fit state to make a will. Dr. Walker's opinion, given the previous day, that Willis’ state may have advanced rapidly in a. few months, was a possible one, but as senile dementia was a slow process, such an instance would only occur once in sev-' I eral hundred cases. Memory was one of ; the first things to be affected by senile i dementia. ! Mr. Quilliam : Would there be lucid intervals in the condition mentioned?•—l believe they do occur in thhi disease, bur with less frequency than in some other forms of mental incapacity. Would you be surprised that three months previously he transacted'" business with the bank manager? - No. it wouldprobably come in the. course of his usual mental habit. You w'ouki expect, then, that be would be able to calculate his estate?—Yes, probably. If the old man sustained a severe shock by the loss of somebody dear to him, might that not bring on ‘ the condition suddenly? - Yes, but it would probably be of a different type; senile dementia was well marked in Willis. Other witnesses who gave evidence regarding certain peculiar traits about the late John Willis were: Mrs. Margaret. Wright and Mabel Edmonds (nieces), and Donald Robertson, farmer. Normanby, Various actions were cited by them as signs of a change in his mental condition. On one occasion, after Margaret Willis’ funeral, John Willis got the table and said he would go and meet Maggie, as he believed she bad fallen on! of a gig. Several of his relatives present told him to remain, but he did not notice of them. This concluded the evidence on behalf of plaintiff, and evidence in rebuttal was then called. AN INTIMATE FRIEND. James Byrne, farmer, Kapuni, said he knew the late John Willis from 1894, and was always on iniimate terms with him. A: times he used to discuss his affairs with witness, and often said he was going to leave his land to his nephew. John William Willis, who lived with John Willis since he \v;;e about twelve years of age. He was a good worker, and always looked after the iarm. At lhe time of Miss Willis’ illness witness was there frequently. On October 21, while visiting the bouse, Willis told him that, he had made a will some years previously in. favor of his sisier, but as she was dying it was no good. Witness then ' suggested that Willis should make another . will. Dr. Milroy, and Mr. Bennett, solici- I tor, were also at the house- in connection with Miss Willis' ilhiess. When they camo | in it was again suggested that he should i make a will. He'asked Bennett about the ; terms of the ’sister's will, and then inrlructed that his should be drawn up in I similar terms. Witness was present the : i-c-xt day (at Willis’ request), at the i signing of the will. Preparatory to lhe j will being signed it was read over by ; Bennett, and Willis said it was perfectly 1 correct. He said “I can leave my money 1 to whom I like.” Even after hearing the evidence which had been given, witness was quite certain that Willis was quite sane when the will was signed. A change was apparent in Willis shortly after his sister’s death. At his request witness agreed to help J. W. Willis (the nephew) 1 to manage his uncle’s estate. To Mr. O’Dea: Did not John W. Willis put up a new house after the will was ; made ?—Yes. Did he uselhis uncle’s money for this?— I Well, yes. I expect you queried this payment—you ; knew that on the uncle’s death the land was to go to John William, and that the buildings were to go with them?—l did not look at it in that way. I put it to you that a lot of these statements about the happenings over making the will are due (.0 your Irish imagination , No. He was san* when he signed the will?— ; Yes, quite. ‘

Would you be surprised that seven days I after that date John William wrote to his ! cousin, stating that his uncle was quite helpless?—Yes. Continuing, witness admitted that in January, 1916, he appointed a companion to look after the old man. The manager of the Bank of New Zealand at Mantua (James Taylor) gave evidence as to being handed an authority giving Byrne and J. W. Willis authority to ■ operate on behalf of John Willis. The i three men were all present then, and, in re- I spouse to witness, John Willis said he uu- ; derstood what he had signed.' Cross-examined: If he had ktmwn that ! a week previously John William Willis had said that John Willis was utterly helpless witness would not have accepted the authority. Similar testimony was given by H. C. M. Ivor, manager of the Bank of Australasia at Manaia.

A NEPHEW’S SHARE. i John William Willis, farmer, Kapuni, ! (nephew of the late John Willis), who waS to receive over £4OOO by the terms of the will, said he lived with his uncle from June, 1911, and during the last eight or nine years prior to his uncle’s death had done most of the buying and selling in connection with the farm work. He received a half share of the working profits. He never discussed wills with his uncle, nor had the latter ever told him he. was to receive the land. His uncle had remarked, however, that witness had been very' good, and would be all right. His aunt had told him about the uncle making a will, but not about the terms of it. John Willis was always perfectly rational in witness’ opinion, but a change was brought by his sister's death. He seemed to be partly | aralysed for some days, and then recovered, only to sink again. In December a big change became apparent, and his uncle suffered from loss of memory. It was then that Byrne and witness decided to get a companion for him. To Mr. O’Dea: He was not at his uncle’s house when the will was signed, but he knew rhe day afterwards, as his aunt told him she had made a will in his favor, and also that his uncle had made one. Witness was questioned about a letter which it was alleged he had written, and in which he had stated that his uncle was quite helpless. “I have never seen if before,” he replied, in answer to Mr. O’Dea. “Whose writing is it?”—l think it is xuy wife’s, She does all my correspon-

dence, as I am not a very good writer. His Honor : Is your wife in the habit of writing your letters and signing your name ? —Yes. Willis denied that he was aware of what his wife had written, and His Honor ruled that, the letter was inadmissible. In the course of further cross-examination he said he was not aware that, his uncle suffered from the delusions mentioned by witnesses, and he had never heard of them. Others who gave evidence on these lines were Robert Willis, Mrs. Bertha Willis, and Mrs. G. Cutter. Cross-examined, Willis denied that he went to Kohuratahi to try and dissuade Mrs. M. Edmond from giving evidence. Mr. O’Dea: You said that if the will was upset she would lose her legacy?—No. Did you not say there would be nothing lefr, of it, as John William would take it as far as the Privy Council sooner than lose it?—No; I did not mention the Privy Council. The case will be resumed this morning.