The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1891-09-23
MILLIONS In 1T.
Opening of the Trial of the Big
searIes Will Case.

SALEM. Mass, September 22.-The hear
ing in the Searles will case opened in the
Probate Court this morning. The hearing is
on the petition of the executor for an allow
ance of the WILL Timothy Hopkins was in
court with his counsel. The first proceed
ings were the reading Of the petition and
the will.
William W. Dodge. witness to the will,
testified to the drawing of the will of MRS.
Searles at MethueD, July 16, 1888. 1t was
read to her and she signed it after declaring
that 1t expressed her wishes. She was to ali
appearances of sound mind.
BY request OF Mr.. Burley, of counsel for
the contestants, the court ordered that the
will Of Edward s; Searles, drawn at the
discussion, counsel for the executors stated
that they did not concede the right of Timo-
thy Hopkins to appear as an adopted son.
Witnesses to the will were then examined.
the main point of the contestants being the
fact that the name of Timothy Hopkins"
was written in blank left for a name and
10 different ink. Witness Dodge explained
that the space was left until he reached Me-
thuen, as he was not sure whether there was
a middle initial. He had been instructed to
9w gIaw the VIII leaving all the property to Mr..
Searles and called special attention of Mrs.
Searles to the section regarding the omission
OF the name of Timothy Hopkins. She said
IT expressed her wishes and the will was ex-
ecuted.
William M. Thompson. gardener, anoth-
er witness to the will, corroborated the last
witness. Examination showed that Thomp-
son could not read.
William 0. Norris, the third witness Of the
VIII, testified 10 eorroboration of previous
witnesses. This closed the case for the ex-
Mr.. Burley asked the executors to produce
the will of Mary f. S. Searles, dated in Nc
vemOer, 1856, and the judge ordered 1t pro-
daced. Mr.. Burley stated that the position
OF the contestants was, first, that there was
no sufflclent attestati0n Of the will, second
that the will was procured by undue infu-
ence and fraud on the part of Edward +.
Searles and some confederates, and third
tnat the testatrlx was not of sound mind at
the time the will was made
This afternoon Edward f. Searles testified
that he first met Mrs. Hopkins in San
francisco in March, 1888. going to her with
a letter OF Introduction to ask permission to
look over her house. The first proposition
OF marriage between the two came from Mrs.
HOPKINS In New York in the fall of 1888.
He did not assent to 1t for a year, but in
December, 1884, he entertained the proposi-
tion. He knew at the time that Mrs Hop
Rms was II years his senior, and could not
well help knowing that Mrs. Hopkins was
lady OF large means. He delayed accepting
she ehe Proposition OF marriage to give her a
After ne entertained 1t. he delayed the mar
rlage three years. He was told. by Mrs.
Hopkins that Timothy objected to the mar
risge, but cherished no iii will toward him
for II. The agreement of marriage was en-
tered into In September, 1887, on the wit
ness's part because he greatly admired her.
In reply TO question he said he married her
Tor all she had. both love and money. He
should never have married her for money
alone. he did net know of the will made
tne day OF her marriage. November s, 1887,
until after her. death, but did not think 1t
was intentionally made behind his back.