The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1888-02-18 00:00:00

DISPUTING A WIFE'S WILL.

In the Probate Division Justice Butt and a special
jury have concluded the hearing of the case of Nicol v.
Campbell and others, having reference to the testa-
mentary dispositions of the late Mrs. Winifred Nicol,
who died in July last, possessed in her own right of
£70,000. The plaintiff, her husband, disputed the
validity of the last will on the ground that his wife
was of unsound mind. By its provisions he was prin-
cipally benefited, but he objected to the residue after
his death going to 13 specified charities.
Mr. C. T. Campbell, the solicitor who had acted for
the deceased, said in cross-examination he thought he
was fully justified in taking Mrs. Nicol's instructions
for her last will.
In one of the letters the plaintiff wrote to his wife
he stated that the charges she trumped up against him
were "scandalous and false," and he subscribed him-
self, "Your attached, loyal, and dutiful husband."
She had no children, but telegraphed in the name of
the dog, as follows: "Ma says will you come home
and spend Christmas with me." (Laughter.) This
was from " Florrie." In a letter she wrote, "The
world is full of disappointments, and we cannot get
all we wish." Ultimately Mr. Nicol went back to Ili,
wife."
Mr. Campbell said he did not form any opinion as
to the delusions, one way or another. Witness knew
she had some delusions, but did not recollect whether
she had a delusion that her food was poisoned or that
she would have to be confined in an underground
cellar with some women. When examined before the
Lunacy Commissioners she conducted herself in a cool
and self-restrained manner. Witness did not know
that after the inquiry was closed that it took four
women to hold her. He left before the inquiry termi-
nated. Mr. Nicol had charges brought against him,
and he wrote that they were "only diseases of an
excited brain." Witness was aware that one of the
charges of cruelty against Mrs. Nicol was that in her
solicitor's office she felled her husband to the ground
with her fist. Witness had heard that Mrs. Nicol
went to Dr. Maudslay and asked him to get her a
certificate of her sanity, and that he did not comply
with her request.
Justice Butt hoped that they were not going to
spend days in trying this case when it was admitted
that the deceased suffered.
In continued - cross-examination, witness said Mrs.
Nicol had alleged that her husband had illegitimate
children, but he was not employed to make inquiries
on this subject. The charges for the judicial pro-
ceedings amounted to £lO4O, out of which £6OO went
for counsel's fees. (Laughter.)
Justice Butt pointed out that this was out of pro-
portion, as counsel usually got one-third of the costs.
A legal discussion then arose in regard to the case,
and ultimately Sir Henry James said he would not
further contest the matter.
The jury was then addressed by the learned judge,
and a verdict was taken by consent in favour of the
will of 1859 and the codicil of 1867, and against the
will of 1878.
Judgment of the court was accordingly given in
terms of these findings, with costs out of the estate.

To MEN.—Before marriage keep your eyes open;
after, keep them shut:-- - ---