The St. Louis Republic., 1903-12-12
Counsel for Widow of PhilO S.
Bennett Criticise Course of
Mr.. and Mrs. w. J. Bryan.
ATTACK ON SEALED LETTER.
Statement Is Made That Mrs.
Bryan Knew All About Its
Contents, Though None of
Benefits Relatives Did.

New Haven. Conn. Dec. 1l.-Counsel
for Mrs. Bennett, widow of Philo S. Ben
nett. to-day filed a long statement of the
reasons for the appeal recently taken from
the decision of Probate Judge Cleave-
land in relation to Mr.. Benefits VIII.
In the formal notice of appeal 1t briefly
announced that objection would be taken
to all the bequests in the will providing
for trust funds for educational purposes
10 be administered by Mr. and Mrs. VII
liam J. Bryan, and also to the appoint
ment of Mr. Bryan as executor and trus-
tee.
PERSUASION ALLEGED. :
That statement was elaborated in the
document filed to-day. which, after re-
peating the clauses to which objection is
taken. says in effect that Mr.. and Mrs.
Bryan induced and persuade6i' Mr.. Ben
nett to sign a paper addressed to Will
liam J. Bryan and to copy considerable
portion Of another paper, the said copy to
be addressed to Mrs. Bennett ~
The papers referred to are the sealed
letter by which NE; Bryan and family
Bennett. and a letter similar in purport
which Mr.. Bryan produced in court.
The appeal says 1t was then the inten-
ton of Mr.. Bryan and his wife that only
the sealed letter addressed to Mrs. Bennett
was TO be brought to her knowledse. and
that was for the purpose of inducing her
to permit Mr.. Bryan to get the sSoOOo.'
1t is also declared to be the intention of
Mr.. and Mrs. Bryan not to make public
the other paper addressed to Mr.. Bryan
as "Mv dear Mr.. Bryan" or to have 1t
brought 10 the attention of Mrs. Bennett.
DOES NOT STATE ALL,
The document continues: 1.-THE writing
addressed to this appellant, the wife of
Mr.. Bennett, did not state the real and
true arrangement which Mr.. and Mrs. Bry-
an had induced Mr.. Bennett to enter into
with them. The fact that the children Of
Mr. and Mrs. Bryan are to receive s15.COJ
or 0r Bennetts money was not stated
but. on the contrary. the writing ad-
dressed to the widow expressly expressed
that If Mr.. Bryan was for any rea-
son unwilling to receive that sum for him.
self. that he shall distribute the $4,000
TONS" while in truth and fact, and in
law, the letter addressed to Mr.. Bryan
constituted him q trustee for his wife and
children. and the sum Of $4,000. il re-
wife and children. ali Of which Mr.. Bryan
and his wife well knew
LETTER MISLEADING.
1t Is declared that the sealed letter ad-
dressed to Mrs. Bennett further mis-
states and is misleading in that Mr.. Ben
nett did not then own nor at any time
thereafter did he own the Bridgeport
houses referred to-" and Mrs Bennett will
not receive under the document probated
as the Will of Mr.. Bennett the amount
that Nj Bennett intended she should
The statement eontained in the letter to
Mrs. Bennett, which says: 1T is my de-
sire that no one excepting You and Mr.
Bryan himself shall know Of this letter
and bequest." Isl declared to be mislead-
ing. because it alleged that Mrs. Bryan
knew all about them.
Several clauses to which objection IS
taken and the sealed letter and the letter
to Mr.. Bryan are declared to have been
PREPARED at Lincoln. Neb.. by Mr. Bryan
Mrs. Bennett and without the knowledge
or presence of Mr.. Benefits family or
business associates. Allegations of undue
influence are made concerning all the
clauses appealed from.