Bridgeton pioneer. (Bridgeton, N.J.) 1884-1919, 1893-04-27

before the Court continued In tn,
Cook will case. Mr.. Sheppard spok'
Tor hours before he closed finally fol
the caveators, his colleague was mo-
present, having gone home yesterday
afternoon. MIR. Mitchell began ar
argument that was one of the strongest
he has ever attempted to make, and ir
order that justice may be done him
| SATURDAY MORNING.
Yesterday afternoon John 8. Mitchell
for the proponents. closed the Cook
will case, and the entire matter was
submitted to the Court, and the de,
cislon OF the judges will be looked for
ward to with the greatest possible In
terest. The case Is a remarkable one
and has excited wide spread attention,
and after volumes of testimony were
taken, the entire Court listened to ar
guments of counsel which required
three days.
In his closing Mr.. Mitchell said that
by the open assertion and admission
OF counsel for the caveators. this coa-
test was for revenge and for the pur-
pose in getting this Court to assist
them in striking back at sister and
brother. Mr.. Mitchell asked If this Is
what Courts are for? He thought
Courts were for the purpose of open.
Ing the avenues of justice, to right a
wrong, and to obtain right.
But these proponents come here
and declare that this contest had no
other object but to destroy the estate
OF David Cook. Such persons be
claimed were devlished, and that they
would not hesitate one moment to
manufacture testimony for the pur-
pose of meeting their ends. He de-
clared that it was an astounding out
rage. Here are three children who
deliberately begin at the time ef
fathers sickness to carry about with
them piece of paper upon which
they noted all the foolish, all the
peculiar, all the trivial acts of their
father, in pain, In suffering, aye, even
when he was near the portals of eter.
nifty, that they might, after he is dead,
prove to Court of Justice that their
father was an imbecile. Such children
We're unworthy the name of children,
and Mr.. Mitchell believed that they
would reap the reward of their ingrati.
tude.
Mr.. Mitchell then went on in accur.
ate discussion of the case. He claimed
that in drawing the will Mr.. Cook had
an object in view. He wanted his
children to share and share alike, so
that there could be no trouble when
he was gone. Again Augustus Cook,
by his treatment of his.father, had be-
came obnoxious to Mr.. Cook, and he
wanted to exclude him from taking
part in the settlement of his estate.
Mr. Mitchell called especially the at
tention of the Court to the testimony
OF James j. Reeves. He asked if any
one would dare question the integrity
OF this witness In matter of this kind
In his testimony Mr.. Reeves goes In
detail into the happenings at the time
when the will was made, and then
emphatically declared that Mr.. Cook
dictated the provision of the will, and
when 1t was read over declared that
it was right, and just what he wanted.
Then Mr.. Mitchell asked If such will
was not the will of David Cook, or
whether it was the will of some one
else.
Mr.. Mitchell then took up the argu.
ments of the counsel for caveators, and
skillfully extracted all the force, and
placed his case before the Conrt in
most satisfactory manner. He re-
viewed certain parts of the evidence
of the caveators and made serious in
roads upon the probability of some of
the statements made by them. In
fact the entire argument of the learned
counsel was despassionate and earn
est plea for equality. right and justice,
and the entire Bench gave him the
strictest attention.