TESTIMENTARY CAPACITY

Taranaki Daily News, 17 December 1930, Page 9

TESTIMENTARY CAPACITY

THE WILLS OF SIR G- HUNTER

PROBATE OPPOSED BY* WIDOW. MENTAL IMPAIRMENT SUGGESTED. ' ‘ >! \ ‘ - By Telegraph.— Press Association. Wellington, Dec. 16. Further evidence Was taken to-day in the case in which Lady Hunter is opposing probate of one of the wills oi •Sir George Hunter. ; Nurse Alice Maud .West gave evidence that was was in attendance from September 27, 1929, until December 19, 1929, and heard discussions relating to tha making of Sir George Hunter s wiIL Witness said to Lady Hunter that she hoped the interview with the lawyer had. not unduly, taxed Sir George Hunter. Lady’Hunter replied: “Oh well, it’s nice that everybody will be happy ■ * have got Sir George to leave Bobby some.” Bobby was Lady Hunter’s young son. ’ ... - ■■■ . _ . ■ Witness said she witnessed Sir George Hunter’s will and. heard Dr. Steele say to the lawyer, Mr. Dann, that Sir George was capable of. understanding what he was about to sign. She had. a vague re- y collection that Mr. Dunn asked Sir George if he understood he was signing his will, and Sir George replied, “Oh, yes.” Sir George had made his mark, because it was considered that the exertion of making his signature would be too great. ‘ ' Later Sir George said he would practice writing -his signature, because, later he would like to fiave another will mode, as it would ; never do for a Hunter to have a' will without a, proper signature. A day dr two later Sir George said he was not satisfied with the will as he had to consider his two nephews, who had been very good to him in attending to hie farm while he was ill and while he was in Parliament. Sir • George continued to make improvement all the time, . - ) a Witness said th-t in August Lady Hunter said that flhe was disputing the will. Sir George had bested her, .and had gone one day to Mr. Dunn’s office, revoked part of tho will concerning Betty, and had left his nephews £5600 'each. Over the telephone Lady Hunter said' that "Sir George was not in a condition to understand altering the will. ' Counsel , for.'Lady Hunter, Mr. Watson,' aSked Sister West whether she had tb be firm With ! Si'r George. She replied that she did not .think so. RECOVERY' FROM COMA. ./. Dr. Hughea Steele said Sir Gedrge. was in'’ a semi-comatose condition when he

had seen him. Witness put him to bed, carried out an examination and had. been to see him twice th&t 'even-. ing. Next morning Sir George had been fairly bright. He' was 'never unconscious. About the third day he was normal. There was no recurrence Of

the coma and he improved all tho .time. A medical man at that stage would be able to observe signs of mental impairment, but he did not see any. Witness hCard from both Lady-Hunter and Sir George that he wanted to make a will 'and Witness said he would let them know when he was fit enough. Mr. Gray; When do you think he was fit?

Wittlefes: Sir George Huntfer was intelligent from the first day and gradually progressed. Sir George was fit to have his will fixed up about October / -i0..'..: . '

' Witness, said lie .had called in private • opinion aa to Sir George's testamentary capacity and Dr. Giesen-had called on October 11. Dr. Giesen reported to witness verbally that Sir George was “all correct,” and . he would be ’sending a cOrtiflcate though witness had never received the certificate,, and As Mr. Dunn ■ did not require it witness had not both- J. cred about it. On October. 12 the will had boom-signed, it having been arranged that Dr. Giesen And witness would be present,, Dr. Giesen had not attended and Dr. McDonald had come in. spoke to Sir George and! asked him if ho knew ho was going 1 . to alga his will and if he knew what was in it. Sir George had replied that he did. Witness was satisfied, that Sir Georgo\knew what he was doing and ; ' was capable of underotahdihg the testamentary dispositions of his own property. Witness had attested, the execution of a eecond will. Witness said that some time later, a conference between Dr. McDonald, Dr. dicson and himself had been held at Dr. Giesen’s rooms, at which Mr. Watson and Mr. Jamee had been ,present. No one At the conference had referred to the existence of a former wilj in 1924. v There had been a general dis- ; cussion as to Sir George’s testamentary capacity, on the assumption that the 1920 will was a complicated one. Since then witness had had an opportunity of comparing- the 1924 and 1924) wills and thought that with the similarity of the provisions, the fact that it was his * own property he was dealing with and that ho■ had the-assistance of his own. lawyer, Sir George would have no difficulty in understanding the Will. „ Witness said he had never heard any suggestion ( about mental impairment until the present case had.started. He said Lady Hunter had- come to see him after Sir George’s death, but had not suggested mental impairment, but only the injustice, of the will, • She did not suggest that Sir. George had not known what he was doing when he made the will.' Witness said his opinion was that Sir George Hunter never had suffered from‘mental impairment. z He had suffered from mental lethargy which had slowly passed away until in . June, 1930, he had had complete control of hi» mental faculties.

Replying to counsel witness said that medically he considered Sir George was capable of testamentary capacity but ho was not sure of the legal side of it. He had since found that he was correct. The court then adjourned till to-mor-TO’W» - * 1 -