Waterbury evening Democrat., 1903-11-07
Judge CIeaveland Admits Him
 as One of Executors
HIS BOND WILL BE LARGE

Attorneys on Both Sides of the Case
 Argued at Length the Question To-
 Day-Judge Stoddard for Mrs Ben
 nett Fought the Bryan Attorneys on
 Every Point.
 New Haven, Nov 7.-The proceed iligs in the probate court to-day in the contest over the will of Philo S. Ben nett in which William J. Bryan has been the figure of interest for several weeks was full of interest because of the protest made by former Judge Henry Stoddard, counsel for the heirs, ageinst Mir Bryan being allowed to qualify as an executor.
 Court proceedings opened with T question from Judge Cleaveland as to whether counsel desired to be heard ed in the case. After some discussion 1t was agreed that a conference be- tween counsel on both sides early next woelS should determine the form of decree to be submitted to the court Cor approval.
 Judge Stoddard then asked if coun- sel for the executors would state defi- nitely whether Mir Bryan intends to qualify as an executor He pointed out that if MT Bryan declines to do so Mir Sloan, partner of MT Bennett. will remain sole executor. MT Stoddard said that he should urge Mir Sloan to continue but protested MT Bryan.
 Co.,. n fY- Bryan, said that MT Bryan intends to qualify and to act as executor
 Then I want to know further" said Judge Stoddard, ''if Mir Bryan in- tends to take an appeal from the de- cision of your honor."
 MT Newton: That we shall decide in due time."
 "Then I enter protest against Mir Bryan as executor," said Judge Stod- dard.
 MT Newton answered: "Mr Bryan will not appeal from the admission of the will to probate. Whether he will appeal on the courts decision to ex- clude the sealed letter he is not re- quired to state now.''
 Mr Stoddard then began a speech of further protest and explanation, saving;
 "Your honor has decided that that sealed letter is not part of the will. We shall insist upon the performance of his duty as executor if Mir Bryan is to act as such But if there is any lingering. suspicion that he intends to take an appeal it is not right also that he shall qualify as an executor, He cannot serve two masters in this mat %e1s d 3y1|4A Jr +~~ To as Your Hop3r has spoken 1t in your decision it will be contrary to the law to undertake to destroy that will. By taking appeal from your decision MT Bryan undertakes course for the ad- vantage of himself and his family He cannot put aside the interests of his family if he chooses to put aside his own in this matter. This is a prop erty affair. If that sealed letter is q part of the will Mir Bryan's family have property interest and unless by some formal renunciation he puts beyond peradventure the question of whether he will try to take advantage of that sealed letter he may also hs considered to claim a property inter- est. It is utterly inconsistent for Mi Bryan to act as executor and at the same time take an appeal from the courts decision. If your honor should hold that that is law shall advise my clients to take an appeal to test that matter. This contest is so exception al that this is proceeding which am confident the courts will not sus- tain.
 Under some other clauses of the will, certainly the 17th clause, MT Bryan takes as trustee and not as an individual certain moneys. I am in- cIined to think that that gift is not good gift. AS trustee under that sec ton of the will 1t will be MT Bryan's duty to uphold that section. If he becomes executof he also stands as executor under the will. Tn that par ticular his position is also extraordi- nary. That creates two contesting parties under the will, and one of fhem seeks to qualify as executor un- der the instrument. should not think that he would want to feel that his duty as trustee might influence him against his duty as executor I again protest against the qualification of William J. Bryan as executor"
 Mir Newton, for Mir Bryan, said:
 T do not know that this court udS III ULDlS maLCGT. MT Bryan's duty as executor in no way conflicts with his other duty under the will In so far as he has an interest as trustee or otherwise that interest is in the same line. There is no possible con- fiict there. In very large majority of wills probated here the executor is also a beneficiary. and the fact that he is a beneficiary does not prevent his acting as executor Often also the executor is a trustee. and often the ex- ecutor brings suit to construe the will This court certainly has left no uncer- tainty in its decision. The argument ny MT Stoddard is on behalf of those who intend to frustrate the intent of the man through whom they have re- ceived large benefits
 n L