The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1903-02-09
Freaks of Will Makrs

II is probable that a whole volume
and very interesting .one at that. might
be composed of the freaks OF legal evil
dence In viii cases. The evidence is
often purely documentary: hence the
paradoxes which arise from time to time
In its Interpretation. II ever such a vol
ume comes To be published, 1t will surely
be Incomplete IL the following case, told
by John Corwin OF the firm of Harris,
Corwin e. Gunnison, IL left out:
The testatrix." said Mr.. Corwin.
died In Brooklyn some years ago. and ~
devolved upon me, as her lawyer to find
and probate her will In trunk ]
found an envelope containing a number
OF very small pieces OF paper. on both
sides OF which was writing. Inside the
flap OF that envelope was written. This
will Is all here in the handwriting and
with the signature Of the testatrix.
You must remember that these scraps
Of paper were very small indeed. The
paradox Is this--that the extreme small
ness OF the scraps was the evidence that
this torn paper was the last will and
testament OF the deceased The law
recognizes tearing as one method by
which testator may revoke a will, and
the intention TO revoke is presumed in
testator who so tears one. But II q
contrary intention can be proved by an
other act done at the same time then
Now, I'm this case. the words This will
Is all here clearly showed that the tes-
tatrix meant those scraps OF paper to be
regarded as her will. 1t remained to prove
that she so meant at the time when she
tore the paper. II she had torn the paper
at one moment, intending by that act
to revoke the will. and had subsequent
" written those words without wit
nesses or other legal formality, mean
fpp 70 -it=a fhA <af H. ro1
will. then the latter act was legally in
valid and the will could not be pro-
bated. Surrogate Abbott took this view
My contention was that the writing
on the flap of the envelope was In tech
nical language a part OF the same re-
gesta as the tearing Of the will. ! ar
gued that IL the testatrix had torn that
paper at one time and put IL in that
envelope at another time some OF the
pieces, small as they were. must surely
have become lost in the interval. The
extreme minuteness OF the pieces, coup
led with the fact that not one piece was
missing. was my evidence that the tear
ing and the putting into that envelope
were one res gesta.
Il had quite clearly demonstrated the
presence OF every piece by taking
sheet OF glass covered with white OF egg
and carefully reconstructing the whole
sheet OF paper upon IT. leaving each piece
with the same side to the glass as its
fellows. In this way 1 was able to pre-
sent the will in legible shape. It's ply
steal completeness established my point
TO the surrogate's satisfaction. for the
presumption that the placing OF the pieces
in the envelope and the writing on the
flap were one res gesta were in my
favor. And so ! succeeded In probating
that will"
To the lay mind the mystery Of the
tearing OF the will remains no less in
teresting than the curious legal evidence !
OF its validity. People who make wills |
notoriously indulge in strange fancies at |
times. ard II may be that this woman i
resorted TO the expedient of tearing up J
her will precisely because that was one |
of the last things which any one who |
wished to preserve a will would be likely !
to do with IL. and consequently no one |
who wished to steal the will would be |
likely TO look for IL In an envelope con-
tanning only minute scraps OF paper
Exchange.