The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-12-12
v. J. BRYAN AND WIFE
SHARPLY ARRA|GNED AGAIN
Objections to Judge Cleaveland's
Decision Elaborated by Mrs.
Benefits Counsel.
THAT SEALED LETTER

NEW HAVEN, Conn, Dec. 11.-Counsel
for Mrs. Bennett, widow of Philo S. Ben
nett, to-day filed a long statement of the
reason for the appeal recently taken from
the decision of Probate Judge Cleaveland
In relation to Mr.. Benefits will. In the
formal notice of appeal 1t was briefly an
nounced that objection would be taken to
all the requests in the will providing for
trust funds for educational purposes to be
administered by Mr.. and Mrs. William ].
Bryan. and also to the appointment Of Mr..
Bryan as executor and trustee. That state
ment was elaborated in the document filed
to-day, which, after repeating the clauses
of the will to which objection is taken,
says in effect that Mr.. and Mrs. Bryan
induced and persuaded Mr.. Bennett to
sign paper addressed to William j. Bry-
an, and to copy a considerable portion of
another paper, the said copy to be adj
dressed to Mrs. Bennett. The papers re-
ferred to are the sealed letter by which
Mr.. Bryan and family were to be given
$4,000 by consent of Mrs. 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. Ben
nett was to be brought to her knowledge,
ducing her to permit William j Bryan to
get the $4,000" 1t is also declared to have
been the intention Of Mr.. and Mrs. Bryan
not to make public the other paper adj
dressed to Mr. Bryan as .'My dear Mr.
Bryan, or to have it brought to the
knowledge of Mrs. Bennett.
"The writing addressed to this appellant,
the wife of Mr.. Bennett, did not state the
real and true arrangement which Mr.. and
Mrs. Bryan had induced Mr.. Bennett to
enter into with them. The fact that the
chjldron M nd prxyan 20
ceive $4,000 of Mr.. Benefits money was
not stated, but, on the contrary, the writ
ing addressed to the widow expressly stated
unwilling to receive that sum for himself,
that he shall distribute the $4,000 among
educational and charitable institutions,
letter addressed to Mr.. Bryan constituted
him a trustee for his wife and children;
and the sum of $4,000. If received by Mr..
Bryan, would belong to his wife and chill
dren, all of which Mr.. Bryan and his wife
well knew"
1t is declared that the sealed letter adj
dressed to Mrs. Bennett further misstates
and is misleading in that Mr.. Bennett 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 Mr.. BEN
nett intended she should have. The state
ment contained in the letter to Mrs. Ben
nett, which says, 1T is my desire that no
shall know of this letter and bequest," is
declared to be misleading, because Ii al
The 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 bust
| ness associates. Allegations Of undue infiu-
ence are made concerning all the clauses
appealed from.