Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-05-19
THE WILL ADMITTED.
Filed Evidence In the Famous
Holt Case.

The most important point scored on the
opening day Of the Holt will case was the
admission in evidence Of the paper which
purports to be the will Of the deceased 1t
was offered by the attorneys for the bene-
ficiaries, and objected to by the lawyers
for the heirs-at-law.
Mr.. Worthington for the latter occupied
some little time in the presentation of his
point. He said that it would be impossible
for the lawyers on either side to refer TO e
case IN all respects similar to the present
one, where the will came as if from the
clouds, being sent by some mean and I'M
demanded person apparently for the pur-
pose Of making trouble.
Mr.. Darlington answered Mr. Worthing-
ton at equal length. He said that he would
show before the case was concluded that
Eeither of the beneficiaries under the will
ever saw the paper until after it reached
the office Of the register of wills. Further
more, he said. there was no reason to
think that the signatures were on separ-
ate piece OF paper from the body of the
Will. The paper was creased and partly
torn across at that point, but Is was evil
IDENTIFY all one piece of paper originally.
Admitted as Evidence.
Judge Bradley briefly reviewed the evil
dence that had been presented so far, hold
Ing that there was nothing to warrant the
presumption that the will was in the testa-
tors possession at the time Of his death
MIR. Wilson urged that there was every
reason to think that the paper was in
Judge Hollis possession, that it was mutt
lated by him, and that it rested with the
beneficiaries to prove by whom the paper
was partially destroyed and by whom sent
to the register of wills.
Judge Bradley said that the presumption
was that the will was that of Judge Holt
and that the only question he was called to
pass upon was whether the presumption
was that the will was in the testator's pos
session at the time Of his death. and that it
was in its present condition at that time
The evidence, he said. did not warrant this
presumption, and he therefore overruled
the objection and allowed the will to be
admitted in evidence.
This was regarded as a strong point for the
caveatees, for if the judge had ruled the
will out it would practically have ended the
case then and there.
Mr.. Worthington then read the will to
the jury.
Mr.. Devlln Testifies.
Mr.. Luke Devlin. who was appointed ad-
ministrator by the WILL was the next wit
ress. He stated that he had never had the
will in his possession.
He was crcss-examined at great length,
the object of the attorneys for the heirs-at-
law evidently being to show that the rela-
lions between the witness and the testator
were never of such a nature as to make 1t
likely that Judge Holt would have named
him in his will for such position.
Mr.. Darlington objected to this line of
cross-examination on the ground that on
the examination in chief he had only
brought out the fact that the witness never
had the will in his possession.
WELL your honor said Judge Wilson,
solemnly, 1.-The very object of this cross
examination is to show by this witness
that he did have the alleged will in his
possession
The objection was overruled, and Mr.
Wilson continued his questions to the wit
ness to show the nature of the relations
that existed between him and Judge Holt
Baltimore Markets.
BALTIMORE, May 19.-Flonr dull, unchanged
receipts. 1852 barrels; shipments, AT barrels
Wheat steady-spot and month. 67Na67Y; July and
August, 66sa661 s-receipts, 90 1856 bushels; ship
ments, coo bushels stock, 723 6S2 bushels.
sales, 36. 900 busheIs-sout hern wheat hY samnle