Pullman herald. [volume] (Pullman, W.T. [Wash.]) 1888-1989, 1891-04-04

II was executed at all, exuorted pv TINS
lady from weak and dying, and possibly
a aeranged, man? And with this question
the learned gentleman sat down.
lie was followed briefly by the solicitor
general and Mr.. Fiddlestick; but thoupb
they talked fiuently enough, addressing
themselves to various minor points. they
had nothing fresh of interest to adduce
and, finishing at half past 3, James rose
to reply on the whole case on behalf Of
the plaintiff
4here was moments pause while he
was arranging his notes, and then. lust as
he was about to begin, the Judge said
quietly, THANK you, Mr.. Short, / do not
think that need trouble you, " and James
sat down with gasp, for he knew that
the cause was won.
Then his lordship began, and, after Civ
ing a mastery summary Of the whole
case, concluded as follows: Such are the
details of the most remarkable probate
cause that | ever remember to have had
brought to my notice, either during nv
career at the bar or on the bench. It will
: be obvious, as the learned attorney gen
eral has said, that the whole case really
hes between two points. Is the document
on the back of Augusta Smithers a sutfi-
cient viii to carry the property, and, if so,
is the unsupported story Of that lady as
to the execution of the document to be be-
heved? Now, what does the law under
stand by the term viii? Surely it
understands some writing that expresses
the wish or will of person as to the dis
position OF his property after his decease.
This writing must be executed with GER
tain formalities; but if it is so executed
by person not laboring under any men
tai or other disability it is indefeasible,
except by the subsequent execution of a
fresh testamentary document, or by its
destruction or attempted destruction,
amino revocandi, or by marriage. Sub
Ject to these formalities required by
the law, the form of the docu-
ment-provided that its meaning
is Clears immaterial Now, do
the tattoo marks on the back of this
lady constitute such document, and do
they convey the true last will or wish of
the testator? This is the first point that
have to decide, and | decide it in the
affirmative. 1t is true that it is not usual
for testamentary documents to be tattooed
upon the skin of human being; but, be-
cause it is not usual, it does not follow
that tattooed document is not valid
one. The ninth section of the Statute Of
l Vic, cap. rs, specifies that no will shall
be valid unless it shall be in writing; but
cannot this tattooing be considered as
writing within the meaning of the act?
l am clearly of opinion that it can, if only
on the ground that the material used was
ink-a natural ink, it is true, that of the
cutie fish, but still ink; for l may remark
that the natural product of the cutie
fGh of C,,o 4iv,,,, ! Il
country for that very purpose. Further,
In reference to this part of the case, it
must be borne in mind that the testator
was no eccentric being, who from whim or
perversity chose this extraordinary
method of signifying his wishes as to the
disposal of his property. He was a man
placed in about as terrible position as it
is possible to conceive. He was, if we are
to believe the story Of Miss Smithers,
most sincerely anxious to revoke dis
sition of his property which he now,
standing face to face with the great
est issue of this life, recognized to
be unjust, and which was certainly con.
trary to the promptings of nature, as e1
aperienced by most men. And vet in this
'ible strait in which he found himself,
Notwithstanding the earnest desire
n grew more intense as his vital
led, he could find absolutely no
frying out his wish. At
rer, this plan of tattoo
IN the living flesh of
stronger person is
him, and he eagerlv
# it; and the tattooing is
t IN his presence and at
as drIy signed and wit