The Savannah morning news., 1903-10-27
BRYAN WAS SCORED
TUE OPPOSING COUNSEL IN THE
BENNETT WILL CASE.
sAID AVARICE MOVED BRYAN
80 Get THE $4,000 THAT WAS
LEFT HIM BY BENNETT.

r,,oi, Breath as Bryan Rose to
.r the Stirring Arrangement.
u;s Reply Was Mild-Was Ex-
,.n.+ory and bore No Invictive
,ooinSt Stoddard or the Opposing
sida-DecisiOn of the Probate
Judge Reserved.
>-ou, Haven. Conn, Oct. 26.-Argu-
vents in the Philo S. Bennett Will
,osa the testimony in which, includ-
inc the unsealing of a. letter in which
a beouest had been made to w. j.
pr,,an. was presented last week. were
,,ord nv Judge Cleveland in the Pro-
bate Court tonight.
1udge Henry Stoddard of this city,
counsel for Mrs. Bennett, the widow
Mr. Bryan, in his own behalf, and
Henry G.. Newton, his counsel. ad-
dressed the court. In the course of his
argument Judge Stoddard arraigned
Mr. BRYAN in severe terms.
Mr.. Bryan in reply said that If
Mr. Bennett could stand being maligned
for his political beliefs, he could en-
dure criticism for following his friend S
wishes
When court opened counsel for Mrs.
Bennett had several documents, prev
iously read in the case, reread, so
that they might become a part of the
records Mr.. Bryan identifying them as
they we're in turn handed to him.
one Of the letters which Mr.. Bryan
identified as his, was written to Mrs.
Bennett. Oct. q. In it Mr.. Bryan ex-
pressed surprise at the course taken
bv Mrs. Bennett in contesting the will.
he wrote:
From the conduct of your attorney
am satisfied that, being one of the
gold Democrats who left US in 1896
and not at all in sympathy with the
political views of your husband and
myself, he is willing to defeat Mr..
Benefits purpose if it can be done"
He says he is satisfied Mrs. Ben
nett's action is due to the persuasion
of lawyer unfriendly to the political
views of Mr.. Bennett and myself
"More Politics Than LAW"
After the letter had been read and
admitted, Mr.. Stoddard asked Mr..
Bryan What conduct on the part of
Mrs. Benefits attorney did you refer
to in this letter."
From the first time that I talked
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 hi, sSgu0ant
referred to the fact that both Mr.. and
Mrs. Bryan are lawyers. He said in
part:
MIR. Bryan and his wife with
Mr. Bennett arranged in Lin
coin, Neb., draft of this
provision and framed this letter
which disposed of $4,000 of Mr.. Ben
netts money. No member of Mr.. BeE-
netts family was present nor notified
OF the fact. Mr.. Bryan has told your
honor that Mr. Bennett wanted to make
different disposition of the $1,000, to
give it to him absolutely. Mr.. Bryan
pam. Mr. Bryan is a lawyer. The
common law says that when a lawyer
draws a will in which he obtains a
oenefactiOn he must show that the in
4uence that he eXerted was not undue.
Is II any wonder then that when Mr..
bryan found himself confronted with
ms situation, he would not permit Mr..
bennett to make that provision direct
TO himself, and so this subterfuge
VAS substituted in place of it? But
,aIs sealed letter does not state Mr..
will
Accused Bryan of Avarice.
"A solemn letter addressed to the
Wte OF Mr.. Bennett secreted from her
lle TACT that $4,000 was going to the
mHe Of this man. Why was it? Did it
Tler INTO the calculation that Mrs.
bennett might object? Mr.. Bryan
anew perfectly we'll that the provisions
" mat section of the will are proscrib-
Cd by law"
IA Stoddard spoke of the Chicago
setler as last desDairing effort. and
alu hryan was desperately in avarice
get the $4,000.
Mr. Bryan rose to his feet as Mr..
,",oudard concluded and in stiffness
sndl was almost oppressive, began
''5' re SdlO IN part.
Reply of Mr.. Bryan.
3. u IS incumbent upon me to respond
W. 80 much of the argument as comes
u u.!5er the head of facts. I wrote the
I'loN the letter that I did because
s,i DeIieved other causes than law in
cured him. There is no cause for Sc
m this will. Mr.. Stoddard seems
ba,Ieel that everybody should have
g.. 81 invited in when it was written.
~ u, mat is not the way wills are pre-
poeu' There is no evidence that Mr..
rr.nett ever consulted me upon law
rdito'ers' Our friendship was personal.
'IF1Ilcal and in the way of business. -
Pr,.o the remainder of his speech Mr..
r. SaH discussed Mr.. Benefits return
New York, how he executed the will.
iast II in a safe deposit vault and
yaa IL there without alteration three
hn!s although he had every oppor-
miaLsSS 10 make such changes as he
"sht have desired.
Mr. '00rney Newton argued the law for
5ar5 hryan's contention. Judge Stod-
Ana men moved that the sealed letter
II me clause in the will relating to
oHl'sregarded in probating the will.
lSlOn was reserved