Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-05-18
Jury Now Listening to the Holt
Will Case.
DISTINGUISHED WITNESSES TESTIFY
Heirs-at-Law Object to Admitting
the Burned Document.
INCIDENTS OF THE DAY

|
known, this is a case to determine the gem
| uineness of alleged viii OF the late
Judge Advocate General Joseph Holt
| Judge Holt died in August 1884 He was
| supposed TO have died intestate and on the
| petition of the heirs-at-law administrators
| were appointed.
| The estate was being admins tered upon
| some advances to the heirs having been
| paid, it is understood, when, the latter
| part of last August, the register of wills
| received by mail from some unknown per.
son or persons what purPorted to be d VIII
| OF Judge Holt. The Star has told of the
| sensation its receipt occas.oned, and Of the
efforts made to discover by whom the torn
| ana nre-Scarred paper was mailed, in a dis
| gulsed hand, and where il had remained
| 1873
The Star has also told OF the GistIn-
| ShlShef s.Ena'ures to the alleged Ins ru-
ment, President Grant aai Gen. AMI Mrs.
| Nm 1. ). Sherman, and of the various
| charges against it, 2eaui:ien,Ss and VALID
| lty E@de by the hriIs-sit- Mr. Luke
| DeViin War department clerk. is named
as executor by the SUI posed VIII. ti,. es-
tate being equally divided by il between
| Miss Josephine Holt TErcczmorton. god
| child, and Miss Lizzie Hynes OF Kcntucky,
| a cousin iy marriage OF Judge Holt
| Inc executor and bouciic;aries coutcndcl
| oil course, that the INSTRUMENT. sa!d to De
! IN The handwriting OF judge Holt, Is g.a..-
| me ana valid, and those are the questions
which the jury VIII be required 10 deter
| mine.
Opening Crowd.
When Judge Bradley took his seal tnis
| morning the court room was by 40 means
| crowded although later on all the seats
| available for spectators were ocas.rel.
The distinguished array of counsel as well
| as the mystery surrounding the viii yiu
! probably make the case one OF the rnr.r
Lab lp rhlf has h..
courts Tor some years pas. Mai and .l-s
lnrocklaorton accompanied Miss THIarR-
morton, who, in connection with ..iys
! liSneS, is named in the will Of 1879 A. rha
| n2lr of the estate OF Judge Holt Miss
| ttEn"s Was also present. MIR. Washington
ID Holt and William q. - arrilt hcirs-ar-!a,y
We're also interested spectators Mr. Ho'r
| was accompanied by Mrs. Holt and Miss
| Holt. About the counsel table were .sroiIr,rl
! Mr. Jere Wilson, McsSrs Worlhington and
| Heald and Mr.. James c. Poston OF Louis
| VILE, NY, representing the heirs-af-Iaw
| WHILE Mr. J. j. Darlington. Mr. BENJAMIN
| Buiterworth and Mr.. Blair Lee aproa red
! on behalf Of the executor and bonciiciarf.s
| Inc estate is valued at between SiIn.uOo
| and $4,000.
Securing "a Jury.
| Upon the suggestion of Mr. Worthinyton
the members Of the jury panel were first
examined as to their competency for serv-
| Ice, being questioned in turn as to whether
they were acquainted with any Of the mar
ties to the litigation and as 70 whether they
had formed an opinion as to the genuine
ness of the will in dispute
James G. PoSton OF Louisville Ky Win
Is associated with counsel for the heirs-at-
| law, was introduced to the court hy Mr..
W Nllson and was admitted 10 practice.
list OF twenty names selected from the
panel was examined by counsel, and after
| exercising the right of challenge twelve
| men took their seats in the jury box and
were sworn, as follows: James ii Traier
V. " npk -,,- los.
nlch, ii. +. Steele Robt. Z. Henalt Samuel
B. jackson, VIM. Flemming, Ahner w
Dangerheld, Richard c. Carr, George +.
trederlck and q. \. Bentley.
Distinguished Signatures.
The first witness was Senator sherman
| Of Ohio. who was examined by Mr.. But
terworth.
The witness was shown the disputed will
and testified that the signature to the will
| of his brother General Sherman. was gen.
uine, also that of Mrs. Sherman
The next witness was Colonel Fred. d.
Grant of New York city, eldest son Of the
\ late President Grant. In ansu er 10 ques-
tions he spoke Of his opportunities for be-
coming familiar with the handwriting Of
his father having been associated with
him for number of years, ami nth him
wien he wrote his book. When asked
about the purported signature of his father
to the Holt will Colonel Grant testified
that 1t looked like his signature, and that
it lad all the characteristics. He said
that he was very sure his father wrote
that signature.
The next witness called was Judge Henry
J.. Burnet: of New York.
He said that during the last year of the
war he knew Judge Holt very well. He WAS
summoned TO Washington by The War De-
partment in 'G3 and was for time en-
ployed in the same office with Judge Holt.
| In this way he became very familiar with
Judge Hollis handwriting. During the
prepa ra ton for the trial of the murderers
q president Lincoln h \ had 81 Office N ha
Wa Department and was in almost daily
communication with Judge Holt.
Judge Burnett was then handed the
burned paper which purpOrts 10 be the last
will nd testament of Judge Holt and asked
whether he could recognize the handwrit-
| ing
objected that there was not sufficient evil
dence before the jury to show that the
paper was the instrument on which the
| issues of this case were drawn. The point
was not sustained however, and the Quse-
ton allowed to 60
In my opinion" said the witness, Tho
| body of this paper is in the handwriting
of the late Judge Holt, as is also the sig
nature at the end of the document"
The witness then produced a number OF
| letters, which re had received from Judge
Holt at various times. The contents were
not made public.
Legal Ability.
| whether he knew that Judge Holt was a
lawyer or not.
Mr.. Lee objected, but Mr.. WorthinSton
pressed the question, SAYING that il was
matter that would have to be settled
sooner or laterf IL was one of their con-
tentions that no man Of legal attainmentS
would ever have written such a paper. He
said that were the matter TO be left only
to Judge Bradley instead of to a jury IL
would not be necessary to introduce any
ak-iI a a Anr
without hesitation that the document in
question could never have been written by
any man of even moderate legal ability.
In answer to a question the witness said
that his association with Judge Holt led
him to believe that the latter was not a
wel-grounded lawyer. He was well in
| formed as to the underlying principles of
| law,but on technical points, such as the rules
| of evidence, &c, he was frequently very
much at sea. In his opinion, Judge Holt
was an eloquent jury lawyer rather than
| careful and erudite student of the law.
Several Of the letters which the witness