The New York herald., 1869-02-14
THE CARRICK WILL CASE.

Final Decision Of the Case Yesterday.
The will case Of Robert Carrick OF Paterson, N.
j.. which has been before the courts for some time
and the circumstances Of which have heretofore
been published In the HERALD, was terminated yes
terday by the decision Of Judge Bedle.
Robert Carrick made his will ON November a.
1866 in which he bequeathed to his wife 100000 and
all his personal estate, goods. chattels, books DC
to his niece Margaret 5000; to the children Dr.
Nesbet, 5000; to the children OF John worden,
$1,000; to his own children, Robert, J. T., Charles
and Catharne, $1,000 each, and TO Edmund N. Pigot
ms bookkepper, $1,000. This amount, 1t was sup
posed at the time, would not take all OF the estate
and be directed that out OF what left, after all
his debts were paid, that $4,000 should 40 to Harry
Ernest Jones, police officer who had been en-
ployed by the old man to apprehend the robbers
who had troubled him a short time previous, and
employer and as was subseq quently proved those OF
his vile also, rs the widow and policeman
married very short time after Mr. uarrlck's death.
TN February IA, 1857, Mr. Carrick added codicll
10 his Will, striking out the egacies 70 Margaret
Csrlck, the children OF Dr. Nesbet. children OF John
Warden and Edmund y. Pgot, OF $1,000 each. $50 900
In all, and also making Aaron s. pennington Jacob
=. Rogers and Mrs. Carrick the executors In the
place OF William Gledhlil, Edmund y. Pigot and Mrs.
CalIick, as they had formerly been. THIS naturally
brought ON protest from those thus cut on from
having IL admitted 10 probate.
II appeared that Mr.. Carrck, at the time OF the
making out or the codici, was In a very low state,
both mentally and physically, and II was supposed
some undue influence had bsen brought 20 bear
upon the mind OF the deceased man by Interested
parties The codicil was signed by 3 A. Van saun
anu f. B. King, az witnesses TO the signing and
vsling OF the instrument; but II seems all the
cot tho old gentleman had given In reply to tue
inquiry u che acknowledged that g be his hand and
se Vi was nod Of the bead" aud there appeare
no satisfactory evidence that he at all understood
the contents OF the codicIl The judges on the
ben eli Judge Bedie presiding and Associate Judges
San, uord, Daggers and Terhune) oil believed that
Mr. ,tarrick was not In his senses when the codici
was tgned by him. He may have been In his own
mind 70 O light degree, but not enough 10 prevent
ms bel pg easily Influenced by others The court was
also di yided In opinion regarding other poinfs
Either VI these would be sufficient grounds Tor
ihrowiut, out the codici The validity OF the WI.
messing % the signing the codic had been sustained
chiefly b. the evidence Of Jane Johnson, bat as the
testimony Of that individual differed nearly every
time ahe had been examined the Court did not feel
justified n paying any attention to II. Judge Bedle
fhpu announced that the codicil OF February IA
Iso7. was rejected and would not he admitted TO
probate. :. 49,
ll appeared clear, and the Court had hesitation
10 admitting u % probate. Upon this instrument.
fnercfore the entire property VIII be adjusted. II
mas frauspred dat the estate 10 more than SUFFICIENT
20 meet every iteN mentioned lp the wiz, Dot ex-