The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1873-03-28

what was the meaning of the extraordinary
will. Mr.. Bennett blandly inquired wha
were the contents of the will, and they relort
ed by asking how 1t was possible that he
hadn't known all about the will all the time
All this amounted to nothing, however, and
the dlsconsolale nephew and Niece then pre-.
ceeded to peur their sad recital into the pro.
fessonal ears of Measrs. Whaley b MlDott,
who undertook to conduct their case before
the courts, and to restore them to their heri.
tage.
The case was then tried and argued be-
fore Probate Judge Buist, and bis decision
was in favor of the will. An appeal was
taken from Lbls decision to the Court of Com.
mon Pleas, the grounds of the appeal being
as follows:
The paper propounded at the will of Han.
nah Vesey ought not to be admitted 10 pro-
bate
i. Because 1t appears that the decedent
could netHer read nor %T and there
2. Because the proponent is sole executor
and principal legatee, and had the conduct OF
the execution Of the paper propounded.
8. Because the proponent, who ls executor,
and was the attorney, principal legatee and
man of business Of the deceased, and that the
paper was either drawn by him or one OF his
clerks, and there Ia no proofs of instructions,
reading over or knowledge OF contents.
T. Because In the cases above mentioned
the o,lus probandt ls on proponent to show
something beyond the ordinary execution and
attestatlon OF the paper.
S. Because the acknowledgment on the
part of decedent that 1t was her will, II proved
would be Insufficient.
6. Because the paper was obtained 6y un.
due influence, which may be Inferred from
the facts mentioned In the first three grounds.
7. Because the will is unnatural and inofi.
clous, and the 0nus prObdndt OF knowledge OF
contents aBd OF fairness Is on the proponent.
8. Because 80 far as any evidence Of knowl-
edge appears It is Inconsistent With the Will,
and the contestants have shown, 30 far as the
ruling of the court admitted, declarations of
the decedent showing an entire want Of
knowledge OF the contents.
9. Because the circumstances iof suspicion
developed IN this case, unexplained, are eVl.
denee that the will In this case was obtained
through fraud.
10. Because the decedent was advanced In
years, and her capacity was doubtful, and the
proponent and legatee having drawn the Will,
II was incumbent on him 10 prove knowledge
of the contents Of the will.
II will be seen that the theory of the con-
testants was that the will was drawn up by
Bennett; that the old woman had little or no
knowledge Of Its contents, and that he had
taken good care to appropriate TO himself the
most valuable part of the property. The case
came on for trial last Tuesday, and Bennett,
who was represented by Messrs. Whaley d
Mitchell, Of course denied all these surnlsea
and assertions of the contestants. The trial
lasted two days, and very large number
of witnesses we're examined. Bennett
swore positively that he did not draw
mp the will, but, on the other hand,
several experts gave 1t as their opinion,
afte. examining many papers written by him,
that the whole will was in bis handwriting.
The history of the old woman's life, her rela'
tlons to the contestants, her former Wills, &C.,
were all elected In the testimony, and, alter
elaborate arguments by counsel on both sides
and clear and impartial charge BY Judge
Gl nam, the case was given to the jury or
Wednesday evening. Yesterday morning
they rendered verdict to the effect that the
paper propounded was not the last will and
testament Of Hannah Vesey, and judgment
was entered accordingly. The effect of this
decision will be TO restore the property to the
nephew and neices, who are the helrs-at-law,
and who, after all their troubles, will now
come Into possession by the due course OF
law