Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1901-04-01
TESIAMENTARY SHREDS.
How Will Was Probated. Though Torn Into
Minute Scraps.

Ii is probable that q whole volume
and Il very interesting one at that
might De composed OF the freaks Of
legal evidence in will cases. The evil
dence is often purely documentary;
hence the paradoxes which arise from
time to time in its Interpretation. II
ever such volume comes to be pub
lishcd it will surely be incomplete if
tie following case. told by John Cor
win. Of the firm Of Harris, corwin &
funnson. is left out:
The tcstatriX." says Mr.. Corwln,
died in Brooklyn four or five years
ago, and it devolved upon me. as her
lawyer. To find and probate her Will
In n trunk | found an envelope con
tanning a number Of very small pieces
Of paper. on both sides Of which was
writing, Inside the flap Of that en-
velope was written: This will il all
here in the handwriting and with the
signature of the testatrix.
You must remember that these
scraps Of paper were very small in
deed. Tho paradox Is this. that the eX
IRENE smallness of the scraps was the
evidence that this torn paper WAS the
last will and testament Of the de
1
one method by which n tcstator may
revoke a will. and the intention To re-
woke Is presumed in tcstator who
80 tears one. But II contrary inten-
ton can be proved by another act
done 1t the same time. then the tear
ing of the viii does not revoke IT. Now.
in this case the words. This viii is ali
here clearly showed that the tcstatrix
meant those scraps ~. paper ~ be re-
garded as her will IL remained to
prove that she So meant at the time
when she tore the paper. II she mad
torn the paper at one moment, IN
tending by that act TO revoke the Will
and had subsequently written those
words without witnesses Or other legal
formality. meaning to revive the force
OF the revoked will. then the latter act
was legally invalid. and the will could
not be probated. Surrogate Abbott
took this view.
My contention was that the writing
on the flap 81 the enNelop" was. in
technical language. part or the same
res gesta as the tearing Of the viii. !
argued that II the testatriX had torn
that paper at one time and put 1t in
that envelope at another some of the
pieces. small as they were. must surely
have become lost in the interval
| The extreme minuteness Of the pieces.
coupled with the fact that not one
piece was missing. was my evidence
that the tearing and the putting into
| that envelope We're one res gesta. The
presence of every piece / proved by
| taking sheet Of glass covered with
white Of egg and carefully recon
structing the whole sheet Of paper
upon it, laying each piece with the
same side to the glass as its fellows.
| In this way I was able to present the
will in legibe shape. Its physical
| completeness established my point 70
| the surrogate's satisfaction for the
presumption R1at the placing Of the
pieces in the envelope and the writing
| on the flap were one res sesta was in
| batting that WILL
| To the lay mind the mystery Of the
| tearing of the will remains no less in
| tcresting than the curious legal cvi-
dance Of its validity. People who make
Wills VIGOROUSLY indulge in strange
| fancies ut times. ana it may be that
| this woman reSorted to the eXpedient
Of tearing Up her will precisely be-
| cause that was one of the last things
| which any one who wished to preserve
| a will would be likly to do with it. and.
| consequently. no one who wished to
steal the will would be likely to look
| for il in an envelope containing only
minute scraps of paper.-New York
| Tribune