Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1886-05-20
THE WILL CASE,
Medical Experts Placed on the
Stand.
A Lively Till Between One OF Them and
an AtOrney-0ne Of the Plain
tiffs Testifes,

This case was continued yesterday be-
fore Judge Boyd. Jerome Miraben, one
of the plaintiffs, was called and when ABOUT
to testify that during spell OF sickness
hat be bad had certain of the oenehcisrles
of his brorhers will tried TO get him,
Jerome 10 make his will in their favor.
Nr. Hubbard objected and the court sus,
tanned the objection. The testimony OF
the witness was unimportsnt, but showed
a great lack Of harmony among the con-
nection. 81,
DR. G. Aekermsnn was then called as
An expert on insanity. To hypothetical
case stated BY Mr.. Russel.-the question
covering the experiences ofthe latter years
of Adrian Miraoen's lite, and which took
lS minutes TO propound-the doctor gave
"a his opinion that such q person was To-
sane, Of least at times. His further test
mony as to the effects of alcohol was about
the same as that Of other physicians who
had testified.
John Robrecht testified that Adrian
called frequently at his hotel where jerome
boarded ios the purpose OF seeing the lat
| ter.
DR.. T. o. Edwards was next called al
an expert. The hypothetical case pro
pounded to DR.. Ackermsnn was read By tn'
stenosrspher aud the witness said that II
such a case the individual was certainly o
unsound mind. On cross examination
witness said this was merely his theory
based on the case stated and that an &C
tusl case would enable him 10 Judge more
precisely.
DE-. j. Z. Reeves was also placed on tht
stand as an expert The hypothetical cas-
vas stated aud the Doctor was asked TO
his opinion as 10 the mental capacity OF
man, under such circumstances, to make
will Evidently weighing his words Will
srest care, he replied: He 10 incapable
of consecutive, reasonable thought, and es
pecislly uusble to consider upon all ques
lions involved 10 making will Oh
,ross examination q lively tilt occurred
between the witness and Mr.. Hubbard, th'
latter demanding to know whether ne ex
D. cted any compensation for his testimony
aud the former promptly testltyinl
rhst he was to get SIS for il, and adding
sith considerable emphasis, that q ply
stefan who has spent life time in scquir
ing his professional knoEiedge had a
much right TO be paid for his professional
opinion as a lawyer had to accept re
taiuer. He was simply giving that whieI
IS recognized by the medical world "a th'
correct opinion IN such cases, and csre'
not which side of the case il might suit
The thrusts between the two geRtiemei
Rere very keen and soon transformed IN
careless louUgers about the court hous
into attentive listeners
Mrs Francis A. McNul,y, OF San Frar
cisco, one Of the plaintiffs, was then Gale,
10 the stand. Her test:EQny was unim
portsnt except as showing the ex,stsucs
a previous will, in which il was Adrian
intention to make aditferent disposition o
his property until, as plaintiff alleges, th'
defendants exercised improper influence
upon him to induce him TO alter that IN
Cenrion. The witness produced the doCu
ment, sad is was placed in evidence. 1t
as tollows:
WHEELING. W. Va, Feb. 3. IS.
Dear sister and nephew, Burt and VII
GINA Latham:
If anything should happento me, Adr's
Nirsben, all my possessions or earthly good
bequesth to you three, Frances McNultj
Bertrand GeNdlty, Virginia Latham, to b
equally divided.
Respectfully Yours,
ADRIAN MIRABEN.
|, Adrian Miraben, being Of sound min
approve this 10 be my last will OF the prof.
erty and personal effects in my possession
Respectfully Yours,
ADRIAN MIRABEN.
On cross examination witness wss sske
if this was not the paper which she ha
been coucealing from Adrisn's executors
and she denied that any intentional COT
cealment OF the same Was attem pied.
At 4.30 Court adjourned thSt the Cour
reporter might take the dspo,itions o
sisters at the hospital. The case will b
continued to-day.