The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1903-10-27
ARRAICNS
MIR. BRYAN
SEVERELY
Judge Stodd(atrd q Unspar-
ing in His Terms.
SAYS HE is GUILTY &
OF SUBTERFUGE
Knew Direct Bequest Would
Not Stand.
THE NEBRAsKAN
SPEAKS FOR HIMSELF
------------
Tells Court that If Mr.. Bennett Could
Stand 8 eeing Malignsd for Politi-
cal Belief He Gould Stand
II for Carrying Out
the Wishes Of
His Friend.
THE NEBRAsKAN
SPEAKS FOR HIMSELF
(By Associated Press.)

NEW HAVEN CONN. october 2e.---
Arguments in, the :sRhilo. S. Bennett WA
case. the testimony.. in which, including
the unsealing of a. letter in which q be-
quest had been made to William ]. Bryan.
was presented last week. WAS heard by
Judge Cleveland the Probate Court to-
night. IA Judge Henrg stoddard. OF this
city, counsel for Mrs. Bennett, the widow;
Mr.. Bryan tn his oTn behalf and Henry
G.. Newton, his counsel. addressed the
court In the course of his arEun ent'
Judge stoddard. arraigned Mr.. Bryan in.
severe terms ME- Bryan. in reply, said
that III Mr. Bennett could stand being
maligned for: his political beliefs, he could
endure criticisms for following his
friends wishes. ~ li.ss}5
5 When court opened counsel for Mrs,
Bennett had severalgd documents, previous
" read IN the case reread. SO that they
might. become a part OF the records, Mr,
Bryan Identifying them as thay were In
turn handed to him. .sSS5s 8
One sof the. letters which s1r. Bryan
identified sas his was .vSri ten. to Mrs Hem
nett October list: 1t fair- ssB Bryan ex--
pressed aurprtss at tne T,oarse takeu--bys
WIN Will
wrote:
4f"From. the conduct OF your attorney
am atIsfDd that, being one. of the gold
Democrats who left us in 1886. nd not. at
all in sympathy with the political views
OF your husband and myself, he Is will
ing5,to defeat Nj. Benefits purpose ifs;it
can he done
He says lie dissatisfied Mrs. Bennetts 3
action lis due to the persuasion of O.
1ax friaD6ly. IN bDOlitiCIl views
CT Mr.. Bennett and myself.
MORE QUESTIONING.
Alter the letter had been read and adj
mitted Mr. Stoddard asked Mr.. Bryan:
what conduct on the part OF. Mrs. Benz
nctt'sA attorney did you refer to in this
lctter?"t
prom the first time that 1 talked with
you I was convinced tnat there was more
politics in it than law. That covers the
ground"
Mr.. Hewitt. associate counsel for Mr..
Bryan. then asked that the will be pro-
bated, and as part thereof the letter
written by him to his wife and found
sealed up.
Attorney, stoddard, in his argument.
referred to the fact that both Mr.. and
Mrs Bryan are lawyers. He said IN
part:
"Mr. BRYAN and his wife, with Mr.
Bennett, arranged In Lincoln, Neb., n
draft of this provision and framed this
letter which disposed OF $4,000 Of Mr.
Benefits money. No member Of Mr..
Benefits family was present or noti-
fled OF the, fact. Mr. Bryan has told
your honor that Mr.. Bennett wanted',to
make a different disposition OF the $5o,-
900. to give it to him absolutely. Mr..
Bryan would not have it, and the rea-
son is plain. Mr.. Bryan Is a. lawyer
The common law says that when a
lawyer draws J. will In which he obtains
a benefartion he must show that the
influenceswhich he exerted was not un-
due, Is-it, any wonder. then.A that when
Mr.. Bryan found himself confronted with
this situation. he would not permit Mr..
Bennett to make that provision directly
to himself. and so this suhterfuge was
subtituted in place OF It? But this sealed
letter does not state Mr.. Benefits will.
It states Mr.. Bryan's will. A solemn
letter addressed to the wife Of Mr.. Ben
nett secretes from her the. fact that
man, why was 1t? Did 1t enter into
the calculation that Mrs. Bennett might
object? Mr. Bryan knew perfectly we'll
that the provisions of that section Of
the will are prescribed by. law.
Mr. Stoddard spoke of the Chicago LETT
ter as last despairing effort, and s.Id
Bryan was desperately driven in avaSce
to get the $4,000,
MR. BRYAN REPLIES.
Mr.. Bryan rose to his feetsas Mr.. Stod-
dard concluded, and in stiffness th,e Was
almost oppressive, began speaking. He
said In part:
"It is incumbent upon me to respond 10
so much of the argument as comes under
the head of facts. wrote the widow the
letter that. did because l believed other
causes than law inspired him. There lis
no cause for secrecy In this Will. Mr..
Stoddard seems to feel that everybody
should have been invited In when 1t was
written. But that Is not the way wills are
prepared. There Is no evidence tina Mr..
Bennett ever consulted me upon law mat
ters. Our friendship was personal, poli,l-
cal and in the way Of business" a.
For the remainder of his speech, Mr..
Bryan discussed Mr.. Benefits return to
New York, how he executed the will,
placed 1t In a safe deposit vault and left
il there without alteration three years,
although he had every opportunity to
make such changes as he might have de-
sired,
Attorney Newton argued the law for Mr.. 4
iI,ryan's contention, Judge Stoddard then
moved that the sealed letter and the
clause in the will relating to 1t be dsre-
gardei In propating the will Decision was
~ seryed. ~