The Savannah morning news., 1902-11-14
WILL DECLARED VOID
CNNEAT - " y. M1NTN AZ TO
FATHERS MIL SUSTAINED.
ARGUED BEFORE ORDINARY.
CASE WILL BE APPEALED TO ST.
PERIOR COURT.

Widow of Late Edward Mcintyre
/ Endeav0rfng. Against Her own In
terests, to Execute Wish of Hus-
/ band-WfII Appeal Cnse to Superior
COurt-By Provisions of Will,
Grandson Gets Bulk of Property.
Mrs. Mcintyre Would share Equal
~ with CaveatOr Did She Not APP
neal the Case-PrON isiOns of the
WiII-Estate valued Mt 100000.
! Fully That Amount Said to Have
Been Advanced to the CRveatOr
by His Father Before His Death.
In the Court Of Ordinary yesterday
afternoon Judge McAlpin sustained the
caveat of w. r. Mcintyre to the pro-
bate of the will of his father, the late
Edward Mcintyre, and declared the in
strument void. An appeal from the
decision of the Ordinary will be made
to the Superior Court. where the fight
over the will will be renewed before
| jury
The hearing of the day before, which
was not concluded, was resumed yes
terday afternoon at O'Clock, at which
time the argument of Hon. S. B.
Adams, representing Mrs Mcintyre,
the propounder of the will, was COM
menced, Mr.. Osborne having argued
for the caveator at the first hearing.
Immediately at the conclusion OF Mr..
! Adams argument, Judge McAlpin rem
dered a lengthy opinion which he had
! previously prepared.
/ mn. nniuinn
| In this opinion he summed up the
evidence adduced at the hearing. the
| authorities cited and the law invoked,
and concluded by sustaining the objec-
| lions to the probating of the will. The
| evidence, he thought, did not show pos
| itively that the testator INTENDED the
defaced will to be considered his last
| will and testament, in the event Of his
death before another one was pre-
pared. The additional fact that can
collation. of the will would operate TO
the benefit of Mrs. Mcintyre, he SAID,
| strengthened this conclusion.
Mrs. Mcintyre will appeal the case
because she feels it to be her duty to
| carry out what she believes is the
will of her husband. The setting aside
| of the will would benefit her very
much, as one of the two heirs at law
of her husband. 1t would hurt the
testator's grandson Ga son of the cave
ator) who is a beneficiary under the
will, but who would not be an heir
in the event of an intestacy.
Provisions of the VIII.
BY the provisions of the will Edward
Mcintyre, grandson of the testator, re-
ceives the bulk of the estate. while
Mrs. Mcintyre receives a small legacy.
The son of the testator receives very
little. The whole estate is valued at
oh M NJ
| tended to make another will is an un-
controVerted fact. The erasures and
| memorandum on the face of the VIII
filed for probate clearly indicate that
The point is, whether he intended this
writing to be his will in the event no
| other were drawn.
With the avowed intention of max
ing new will, Mr.. Mcintyre some
| time prior to his death took his will
| and made numerous erasures and al
| terations. For instance, the name of
the place where the instrument was
| executed, bingham county, was
marked through with pencil, and over
| ii was written Chatham county. In
one portion of the will provision is
| made for the disposition of his stock
| in the Jackson Metzger Company.
| Pencil lines were also drawn through
| this portion OF the instrument, the
| stock having been disposed of by him
|
InteHtiOn of the TestatOr.
Over the names of the beneficiaries
| a strip of paper is so pasted that by
| raising it the names of the beneficiaries
| in the will as originally executed may
be seen. On this paper is written
| Leave two lines" Similar slips are
pasted wherever the names of the ben
| eficiaries appear. This was done, Mrs.
| Mcintyre explained, to prevent the
scrivener from knowing TO whom be
was to will his property, it being Mr..
Mclntyre's intention to fill in these
| names himself.
The name of the testator has a pen
| Gil line drawn through it, as have also
the names of the subscribing witness
! eS, presumably to prevent the scriY-
ener's copying these names, which
would, of course, have to be original
signatures. Opposite the names of the
witnesses so erased, appears, in pencil,
the names of those whom Mr.. McIn-
tyre desired to have witness the re-
formed deed.
Argument of Counsel.
Mr.. Osborne, for the caveator, ar
| gued that the erasureS of the
signature of the testator constituted a
cancellation. This point was met by
Mr.. Adams, who contended that the
cancellation amounted to nothing I'M
less done for the purpose of revoking
the will, and that the uncontradicted
evidence showed that the pencil marks
through the different portions of the
will were but a means to an end and
not in themselves cancellations.
That he intended the will to stand,
Mr.. Adams argued, was shown by his
statement made on his deathbed to
the effect that unless he made another.
the old will was to be considered his
last will and testament. Mrs. McIn-
tyre testified that Mr.. Mcintyre did not
intend for his son to receive a large
portion of the estate, because he had
excess of the value of the whole estate
excess of the calue of the whole estate
left by him.
Those present at the meeting were
Commissioners A. b. Moore, Vice
Chairman A. Vetsburg, Jacob Paulsen
and Albert WILLY, and Messrs. Reu-
ben Butler, clerk; George T. Cam,
county attorney, and w. H. Chaplain,
| erNy ,ax~sr,f av, e