Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1891-04-05
was just the other way.

49, ONeNOA-0 49, ~ -~~~@AO
copy of an anonymous letter.
He did not propose to cast re-
Elections on Gov. Stevenson. 1t
was the custom in Gold Hill years
ago to do a good many things which
ought not to have been done and
he asked the Court to rule the an
onynous letter out entirely and
not have such a remote circum-
stance dragged in.
The evidence was in his opinion
that Mr.. Stevenson allowed his wife
to control him in small affairs, but
In business affairs Of weight he
did not allow this interference.
He considered that the proof
all went to show that the will was
the testator'S deliberate act.
NIB. wooDBURN's ARGUMENT.
Before the opening Of Nj. Wood
burns speech the question Of the
admissible of the anonymous let
ter as evidence came up.
The Court had ruled that 1t was
only admissible If a conspiracy
could be proven by 1t.
The Court stated that 1t would
hear arguments on that PROPOSE
ton and rule during the argument.
1.-THE court pleases in presenting
to you this case. I do not here
purpose to reflect on the testimony
Of any witness unless duty to my
client as well as myself demand
that it should be justly criticised,
Mr.. Coffin, who represents the
proponent, says that the only issue
rendered by the contestants that Is
worthy Of notice is that Of undue
influence; and he cites some au-
thorities to show that under that
issue the declaration OF the testator
prior to the execution Of the will is
incompetent for any purpose.
II you will examine the authori-
ties before you decide on this quss-
ton you will find that every case
which the authorities have refer
ence TO is upon the consideration
OF contract.
Undue infuence-I undertake to
to say that there il not a case to
found but what would be uni
form in proposition that the de-
clarations OF the t-stator, up to the
time Of the execution Of the will.
are always admissible for the
purpose OF showing the character
Of the testaeor's mind toward
those who should naturally be the
recipients Of his bounty, You will
find also that the party who keeps
the bulk Of the property uR-
der an unnatural will, that all de-
claration towards the sons of the
testator are admissible evidence.
And some of the authorities 60 this
far that the declaration of the
testator subsequent to the eIcu-
ton of the will, under an issue OF
that character are admissible. II
this is correct no issue of undue
influence would even be made
in a will contest in court OF JUS
tice. Undue influence is a fraud
in secret and in dark
ness; unfolded by circumstances,
and proved by circumstatial evi
dence. The party does not go out
on the public highway, or make
exhibition in the presence ofstrang-
ers.
l find that the modern authori-
ties, while they admit that there Is
q legal definition Of undue infuen-
ce, ara not defiently set as to the
limits that bind it; they say that
what may be undue influence in
one case must stand or fall upon
the peculiar fact and circumstances
it. Here stated that he
did not think there was any more
clean or strong definition of undue
influence then is laid down by the
court in the case of--reads extract
I donot find any conflict OF au-
thorities in those cases, and have
looked all through the library for