The morning call., 1894-12-01

TO be her will. and sought to have probated
as her will. He further sought to be ap-
pointed administrator of the estate. Tie
two documents were regularly admitted to
probate on July 20. 1891, and Metcalf quail
fed as administrator.
Afterward, on July 10, 1892. within the
year prescribed by the code, the said Anna
I. Wolseley Nady Wolseley), Samuel j.
and Daniel L: Murphy filed petition for
revocation of probate of the WILL The
contestants alleged that the two written
Instruments did not constitute the last will
of Mrs. Murphy; that they were never
executed by her as her will; were never so
intended by her nor regarded By her as a
completed will; that they were only a
memorandum, to be submitted to her attoT-
hey, from which a will was to be made in
the future. The contestants subsequently
flied an amended petition, in which they
alleged the additional grounds that the
said instruments were procured by fraud
and undue influence; that the deceased
was of unsOund mind and was under the
controlling influence of her unmarried
daughters, who made false representa- tiOns
to her about the character of the contest
ants, etc.
Everybody rememb ers the sensational
Murphy will trial before the courts in Oak
land. There was much sensational tesu-
mony and many sensational letters, and
many lawyers bitterly contested the case.
co ntestants again amended their petition
by averring that it could not be shown
which of these instruments was last exc
cuted; that the documents were incOp-
sistent and irreconciable. and did not TO-
gether constitute a last will. This last
amendment was made more than two years
after the prnbating of the instruments as
Mrs. Murphy's last will.
However, the court decided that the doc
um ents were duly executed as a hol0-
gTaphic will. and on all material issues the
decision was in favor of The proponents.
but the court for all that decided the case
in favor of the con testants and revoked
the probate of the will on the point raised
in the last amended petition, viz. that the
two instruments were inconsistent and
irreconcila BILE. The court said: "Ir Can
not be shown from the evidence which of
said two documents was executed last, and
no act of the deceased subsequent to the
execution of the said documents, or either
of them, has explained them, and it is
impossible to ascertain the relative chron-
illogical position of said two conflicting
documents" On these grounds it was
decided that Mrs. Anna l.. Murphy died
intestate and that probate of the two
documents ADM ted as her will must be
revoked. From this judgment the propon-
ents of the will took an appeal.
In deciding in favor of the two docu-
ments as Mrs. Murphy's will, the Supreme
Court SAYS: LAS the court finds that the
two instruments were executed on the
same day, and that there is no evidence to
show which was, on said day, executed
last, it Is evident that the questions pre-
scented to this court are to be determined
upon consideration of the said instruments
themselves" Then follows a considera-
ton of the authorities presented by coun-
sci on both sides in support Of their argu-
ments.
The instruments in dispute are recited,
and one roads as follows:
LONDON England, MAY Is. 1890.-Being IN
perfect health aud in full possession OF all my
faculties, vet Knowing the uncertainty of life,
/ write this letter 10 my children. that they may
Know how TO make distribution OF all my
property when | die. Therefore, l wish IL
plainly underst that desire all or when L
am possessed at nv death, whether real estate
or personal prop tly, of whatever description,
10 be equally divided between my tnree
daughters, Mary Helen Murphy. FRANCES
Josephine Murphy. Margaret Isabella Murphy.
Should either OF these three daughters die
surviving daughters. In case THESE daughters
die without children wish the children OF my
eldest sou, Eugene Kelly Murphy. the entire
properly they may leave to lnherit snare and
share alike-Eugene BessOn Murphy, Mabel
Murphy, Charles Murphy.
ANNA l.. MURPHY,
IL Charles street, Berkeley square, London.
England
| May Is, 1890.
| The following is the other instrument:
May 13, 1890, London, England. Being IL
perfect health and in full possession OF my
| faculties, yet knowing The uncertainty OF llfe