The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-03-04
ANGUS WILL CONTEST.
Mexia Which
volvedThe Sensational One
Connected Herewith.

letters and much correspondence in Snan.
ish and English by General Mcxia was
read in evidence.
The trial OF the case has occupied y
month. but interest in some Of its sim
gular features and dramatic incidents was
undated during its entire progress
through the court.
1t will be remembered that General
Mexia's father Disguised with the tyranny
or Santa Ana. took the part of Texas In
its contest with Mexico. and was cap
tured and shot by order of Santa Ana
Judge Eckford has proceeded in the
trial of this case with great fairness and
ability. His conduct has been compi-
mented by the attorneys oil both sides, Us
pattern, fair and impartial.
The result of these respective motions
Will be made known
~
After month of wrangling the case
went to the jury two weeks ago. Judge
EcEfords charge is.of interest. 1t follows:
No. 1904, Estate of e. A. Mexia VS.
q. w. Mexia ct al. contestants
men o. the Jury: If E. A. Mexia was
of sound mind and was not unduy in
nuenced he was competent to make a
last will and testament aud THEREBY di-
vest and bequeath all Oh. bis estate, real,
personal and mixed to whomsoever he
saw tit.
There are two questions in this case
for you to consider and answer The
| first question Tor your consideration ~.
Was e. ~. Mexia. at the time Of the
execution of the paper propounded
herein for probate, of sound MUD? To
this question you viii answer yes or
no on the blank below. such answer to be
signed by your foreman on the limo left
for that purpose;
AIS OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES. ...............
Foreman.
| In the consideration and determination
of this question you are instructed to
consider all OF the evidence which has
been admitted before you, including the
paper which is propounded for probate,
giving to each portion such credibility
and weight as you may think it entitled
to.
You are further instructed that the evil
dence which has been admitted before you
with reference to the question of whether
or not Mary Gray MeXia was the wife of
the testator, General e. A. Mexia, was 20
\ admitted as a circumstance bearing upon
the questions of whether or not the tes-
tetor was of sound mind, and as to wheth-
er or not In the execution of the paper
propounded for probate he was unduly
| influenced. and for no other purpose.
man may change his will as often as
1t pleases HIM to do so. and il its has
been proven that Z. a. Mexia did so
/ ehange his will, then you will not con-
| clude from that fact alone that he was
or was not of sound mind. or that he
was or was not unduly influenced. but
| you Will consider all of the evidence
which has been admitted and therefrom
determine whether or not. at the time
he executed the paper herein propounded
lor PROBATE, he was or was not of sound
mind, and whether or not he was unduly
influenced In the execution OF the same
III at the time of executing the paper
herein propcrnded for probate. the said
General u. A. Mexia was capable of I'M
| derstandlng the nature of the business
ne was engaged In. the nature and ex-
tent OF his property. the person or per-
sons to whom he meant to convey it, and
the mode of distribution among them,
this Is sufficient, and he would have what
is called testamentary capacity. In other
words, he would be, in contemplation of
| the law, of sound mind
II. IN the consideration Of all the evil
dence which has been admitted before
YOU you conclude that the same proves
to your satisfaction that Il. A. Mexia
was of sound mind. as the same Is
above defined, at the time Of the execu-
tlon OF said paper propounded for pro-
pate, and that said paper as will was
not revoked by him. then you will an
swer the question above propounded in
the affirmative.
II, however he had not the qualities
or capabilities above enumerated, then
he was not in condition TO make a
valid will, and in the event you so find
and believe. you will answer the ques-
tion propounded above in the negative
2 The second question for your con-
sideration and answer is: Was the tes
tator, e. A. Mexia, unduly influenced
| in the execution of the paper herein
propounded for probate You will an
swer this question yes or no on the
blank below, such answer to be signed
/ by your foreman on the line left fol
that purpose.
Ans OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES.
Foreman.