New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1879-03-20

examinations quite as coDsncuous ms those r
the Will and codic conested-such testimony eea.
tnly deserves careful scrutiny, and excites tine te
sonabe apprehension that 10 may have Deen
A. To The fact of such an unequal distribution. sufficient
been said heretofore based upon th9 wei ,ti
cred authorities upon the subject OF an aleHed un"
ful Will. -, a.. ,o,,,
sought TO be made statement OF the deceIent
respecting The viii IN question: that ne eoud NOT uah1
different will II he made hundred fOr u Is enlrcy
make different WILL but the significance OF the remark
was hat had made 10 discreety ana Wisely Is he
was caDabe OF Ia other words, that the schebe oi o
will commended Isef to his deliberate judgment,
The alleged different treatment by the dectden OF M
by the fact that when tested his capacity ~ the
great business enterprise which had so larsey occupio
his attention. he proved to be equai 10 the trust epo
In him as n successful railroad man 49,, ~,
The statement of the decedcnt that the Central Road
wears has no slgnncanee excert that he intended to
say and believed, that thai enterprise had Dee 50 urn!
established. and Us policy fixed thai II needed 10 eA
trHordinary skill to continue 1t as successful enter
prise. - 1900.
AMBITION NOT FAILING OF WEAK MINDS.
It may well be that persons will differ widely a. 10
the proprety OF the decedenrs ABOLITION to perpetua'e
the great railroad enterprise which he had devoted
so much OF mis- business life and energy as monument
to his great business skill and success ana as TO the
good taste Of his Boosting OF it.
But wherein does such ambition indicate uosound-
ness OF mind 1t must be quite apparent from the
testimony that by his will he adopted the wlsest
means to secure that ougchershed end; for, in the
light OF the character capacity habits and aims OF hs
son Cornelius testified 10 BY himself II Is NOT dl
cult to perceive how utterly that purpose must nave
failed had Cornelius been made Jointly an equa re- "a
nary legatee with William ii: Nor IS V much more nin
cult to predict wnat would have become OF tno aeco
ostered by II mad the estate been equally diVldea DC
IT, as the Testimony shows, the decedent had the
cherished ambition to secure ana perpetuate the DUST
ness winch mad absorbed much OF his time, care
and business skill. and which had brought him great
fortune and personal fame and credit no one Knew pct
ter than he the imperative necessity Of sugle mind
nd will n nd
all thu facts. VIII presume to say That suc an anllOn
was either unreasonable or unworthy much less that 1t
was irrational, Judging from the common level OF COM
meTcal incentives aDd h0ptsf
entertained the idea of erecting an unprecedchtrdly
high ument and after giving 1t consideration ADAM
and remote to form safe basis of judgment as 10 his
mental sOundncsS for II entertaining sGcn Thought
was unreasonable the abandonment Of such unreal
sOnaDe project can scarcely be ascriDed to mental
enfeebement or rratiOnalty.
NOT PROOFS OF MENTAL UNsOUNDNEss.
The only other fact proved by the contestant that
seems to deserve special consideration upon this
branch of the subject Is the alleged prejudice existing
in the mind OF the dccedeDt his son Cornelius J
and his iliberal treatment Of him by his will II Ia
probable that many wise and just men VIII be-
eye that the infrmitles OF Cornelius j. should
have influenced his father TO more liberal ana Khd
consideration OF his shortcomings and necessities
and to have dictated more generous provision Ior
him IN his will and that the failure to do SO betokened
"A lack of parenta affection ana justice Yet gross IN
justice and reprehensiDe cruelty very olteh HhIle'
themselves IN men who are In all respects men ay anu
morally RESPONSIBLE for their conduct But u cannot Oe
overlooked that IN the character ana Tue hDils q" OU
nelius j. there was mue! wion was CnGu t
observer they may not seem To nave )usheu the JUS
crmInaton against Lim. vet am OF the opinion that 1t
falls far short OF proof tending 10 SHOW uhsouhuhees Vi
mind.
The testimony given by the various witnesses Tor the
popunents the mental soundness OF the CON-
modore at the times when he executed the will and cod
III tho urr af.'s
He then continues:
In passpg upon the testimony relating the mental
condition OF the given by those who knew saw
,i corvars.d with him dPine life it is proper and
ce.sary TO take into account the relative III
tengrnce and credlbillty OF the TWO classes Oh
wi ssses and their relative or, Orun!tes ~ indg-
Ing, aud in doing 1t IL not DIM ult to determine
where the pr ponderanee lies. Inc tesuinony' mnen
carefully considered, shows th't Tue deeedeht was ~
great business enterprises, OF ndOtdOe perseverance,
OF mpeious WILL OF strong prelullces, OF ptomPt anI
wise adaptation " TO desired end. Of clear ana
coherent mind, ready perceptions, qlch ana accurate
conclusions with almost inluil We ana lnSD.' JUL
mind and strong nature but lacking tHe aheii,ie
education culture ana delicate respect IoT thc
opinions of his Ie lOw-nen.
WILLIAM H. vANDERBILT's INFLUENCE.
The next question considered IA whether william
II. Vanderbilt exercised such an influence over the
decedent in respect 10 the win and codic as amounted
In law to fraud undue influence In considering this
question: It is proper give due weight TO the sOcaed
to the witnesses who have testified TO them not
because person sound mind may not lawfully change
his mind respecting the purposed disposition OF his
property, but because such change Without any ap
parent circumstance 90 be considered IN con-
ncrou with other facts TO show fraud or undue lnu-
eace II reasonable. also, to give greater weight 10
sucn declarations harTOnize with the terms OF the
will and to those made nearest the time when he viii
was executed, after which there was no substantial
change either in his fortune or IN his family.
There IL u rad cal and irTecOnclabe conflict In
the testimony upon this subject Hence. where the
truth lies must determined upon the relative cTed
bty witnesses. the probabilities of the case and
other cOrrobotatIve facts. The numerous decarat
Of the dcccdent TO his testamentary purposes IN
harmOny with the terms or the VIII rOteRlcu seem 70
be entitled To greater weight, NOT ODy because OF the
intelligence and candOl OF the wunessrs WhO te,tlhed
thereto, but because OF such cohcufchcc WIN c terms
the WIN aud eodlci-and almost GoHoi"siyey 80 De
years before were based npon u similar Seheme,
except SO far rs they Disseminated more naTshly
against the dissatisfied next OF KIN. lnueed, such
antecedent wills, framed as they were ~ an SUP
stantial respects like tue one contested, except that
tie latter less stringent III It's provisions ana be-
queihed Drgcr Sums 10 me t2Ptlstu heAt ~ An
10 establish satisfactorily that the instruments con-
tested express the lOngcnerained rsamo lafV pur-
pose OF the decedcnt formed when he was ol uI9ues
Toned sound mind and in the enjoy ment ot DIS iu NEIL
THIS evidence unlike the oral declarations, which
may nave been imperfecly heard or apprehended, or
possibly materially mod ded oy the lapse OF TIL memory
Of witness is clear ana certain because deliberately
and with due legal ormaly rec f1ed ana preserste.
throughout this proceeding the contestant has sought
TO establish AS a fact that the deeedtnt for many
entertained opinion vi Tue
cIty OF lis son William and after WAS placed
Ia IA responsible Official position III the IafOt corpora
lions mentioned, lac sought OF resp Ced his Oph-
ion unon IMPORTANT business matters. And vet II ~
famed tnat William H. able To OSernaster and dom
mate the will and purposes OF the deceueu In Tue most
portant act Of MS fetLe disposition OF his colossal
fortune.
THE DUBIOUS CONSPIRACY WITNESSES.
The next aud ual branch OF this question 10 be con-
sidered is the alleged fraudulent conspiracy to dera I'd
the decedrnt LIS will rs he did, by means OF
att
the spirit of bis deceased wife, advising that he should
make his son William H. his p and give all MS
property TO him. testified to by MrsStoddard and Mrs
stone Tue dscreditable and fraudulent enterprises In
which those TWO witnesses claimed 10 have been en-
gagged tneir or teeryng. their d'sreputaDe an