Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1902-03-29

L cannot see mas any Interest III tnlS |
case one way or the other. He is an |
honorable man so far as / know. |
have known him some time. He was |
n good witness. l have his testimony |
written out here. l have been over |
it, as well as over the bulk of the other |
testimony of importance in the case.
He tesrities that he was the physi- |
clan of Mr.. Cornell and that lie call
ed on him about certain date, and
that in n conversation which he had, |
Mr.. Cornell declared to him that lie
had executed a will; that he had named |
these persons as executors; that he was
satisfied with it, and was glad that
it was Off his hands Now, did tina
man testify falsely about that matter!
Did Doctor Murdoch take the stanu
in this case and make that out of
whole cloth? | don't think so. If he
did not, and he told the truth about
1t, then Thomas Cornell signed this
will, ana he knew that he had signed
it too. He was not in such condition
of mind that he did not know what he
was doing, OF he would not have re-
membered to tell the doctor about it.
But, there is another view of the
case. Mrs Paige, who is one of the
witnesses to this will, testified that
when she signed the will-she and her
mother--it was in the parlor of the
house; that Mr.. MclFarlin came down
the stairs waving the paper and said:
",rhe will Is signed" and had them
sign MS witnesses. This, of course, is
contrary to the testimony of Aungst,
but | am leaving Aungsts testimony
out OF consideration f. the present.
When her attention was called to her
written testimony. she testified that
She remembered nothing about it at
ALL had no recollection of ever sign
ing the testimony that is attached to
this will and subscribed by all of these
witnesses. / took pains to cali her at
tention to that matter.
That brings me to another point in
the case, and that is, the power Of this
court TO set aside this probate.
The view that l take makes it I'M
necessary for me TO decide specifically
whether the court has any power to set
aside this probate or not, hut think
1t has. | think that If it could be
shown I'm any court that any Judgment
was fraudulcntly entered, shown be-
yond the peradventure of doubt
for Instance, in this case, il 1t could be
shown that at the time of the making
of the will, the 23rd day of May, 1892,
Thomas W. Cornell had been dead
for five years, do you suppose this
WILL or the probate of it, would stand,
VI any JuuBbtut VI lndJ hlnu tOulu
be made to hold as against evidence
of that kind? | think not. But, as
| have said it Is not necessary for me
to pass upon that particular point.
Now, the testimony of Mrs. Paige
needs an explanation of some kind
What Is it, Wen, it appears, in the
first place, that this will was there
for some time; other papers were exc
cuted besides the will by Mr. Cornell
about this tmcr-qulte number of
them; certificates Of stock were indors-
ed In blank. How many other papers
Were executed at this time of which
we nave no knowledge, | am unable
to say. He was II man Of large bust
ness interests. | have an idea that
he signed n great many documents that
we have not heard of in this case at
all. There Is not the slightest doubt
about that in my mind And IL Mr. Nc
Farlin came down the stairs with a
paper In his hands, saying that it had
been signed, | think 1t was not this
viii, but something else. Now, what
was the paper that was signed in the
parlor by Mrs. Paige and her mother.
II 1t was not the willg think 1t was
the testimony to the will. Judge sru.
art went there because of the age and
indispoSition of Mrs. Mcclure, and took
her testlmony,a "a common thing for us
all to do, a thing that Judge Grant has
done thing that Judge Stuart has
done many times, and thing that
have done. Having taken the testi.
mony of Alexander Aungst to this VIII.
-