Case ID: super-ct-jud_1/html/0251-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      The Court,\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gibbs vers. Gibbs.
    Prefent: The whole Court.
    Questions of Law on the Construction of a Will must be raised by special Verdict, and not by an Objection to Evidence, on the ground that it does not support the declaration.
    THE Demandant counts as Heir in Tail under a Will.
    
      Mr. Auchmuty
    
    objected to the Will going in as Evidence to the Jury, because the Will did not support the Declaration, as it gave only an Estate for Life to the Ancestor of the Demandant.
    
      1767.
   The Court,

after a short Argument, were unaniously of Opinion that the Exception was the first of the kind ever made; that, if allowed, would destroy all Wills from being Evidence, as it would bring the real Point in (as they expressed it) upon a Side Motion, and would be subversive of the sitherto uninterrupted Course of Practice. The Exception being overruled, the Court said, the Will should go in, as Evidence to the Jury, who, upon finding the special Matter, would bring the Point of Law properly before the Court.