Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-03-29
THE BELFIT APPEAL
 EVIDENCE IS ALL IN.
Arguments Began At 2;l5 O'clock-A Queer Case and Many Contradictory Statements-The Gentle Kit ten Cut Big Figure in the Case-One Witness Has $7,OOO Claim Against the Estate.

The nearing Of Mrs Nellie Relnt s appeal from probate was resumed to- day at 11:15 o'clock in the superior court room before Judge Wheeler and the jury. Mrs Belfit claims to have been sighted by Mrs Mary A. Chdp- man in her will. Mrs Chipman lived on Abbott avenue and appellant Is grandniece. In her testimony last week She said she had always under stood that Mrs Chipman would re- member her in her wall, that Mrs Chip man had frequently intimated as much. The main evidence for the contestant was an alleged peculiar at tachment by Mrs Chipman for cat
 The witnesses to-day were Mrs Christiana Spencer, wife of I. A. Spen- cer. Jennie Somers. 69 Abbott avenue; Edward 1. Root administrator of the will Mrs Ida Farnham and Charles R Norton
 the-will. He testified that Mrs Chip man was trustee of an estate valued at $5,3OO and that she managed 1t carefully and proftably
 For the defense, Mrs Ella D. King of Winsted was the principal witness for the appellant. Mrs King was re lated to Mrs Chipman and she also knew Mrs Farnham- The latter, she said. had often expressed doubts as to Mrs Chipman's mental capacity. She said Mrs Farnham was much dis tressed about Mrs Chipman's condi- uon and that she had a falhng out with her because she. Mrs Narnham, would not attend to the cat. Witness Is granddaughter of Enos Granniss, brother of Mrs Chipman and, in the absence of will by the latter would be entitled to a share of her property.
 Mrs Belfit was recalled and testified to having several conversations with Mrs Farnham about Mrs Chipman and also about the cat. On one oc- casiOn Mrs Chfpman made Mrs Earn ham so angry about the cat that she said she would neyr go to her house again, and that Mrs Chipman was ut terly unable to make will after Mrt Ways death. she was so prostrated by that sad event Mrs Farnham told witness that Mrs Chipman made will at that time. and also that
 Kitty" meaning the cat, slept on Mrs Chipman's bed and that 1t wasl not a pleasant matter.
 Mrs Farnham also told her that if Mrs Chipman gave Mary Lawlor a V house sle would contest the will This was said dn q conversation about a del cline in the domestic arrangements of the house. Mary Lawlor was a ser want for Mrs Chipmtan at that time.
 Dr Thomas Bland. the next witness. I said his premises adiofned Mrs Chip mans in the rear that he knew her we'll and had many conversation with her. During MT Ways illness she called upon witness to attend the cat and told him that dts illness was due to the treatment of his men The doctor replied that his men do not ill., treat animals. From other converse | tions with her he inferred she was greatly attached to the cat and In constant fear that someone was try ing to injure 1t. It was his opinion that She was not sane.
 The case of Charles H. Bristol. ap- peal from probate, was withdrawn from the superior court to-day. a set dement, having been reached.
 Mrs Lhwlor. above mentioned, testi- | fled she knew Mrs Chipnlan since 1888 and lived in her house some time. Witness had claim against l the estate for S7.OOO Some months before Mrs Chipman's death the lat ter promised to fully recompense her for her work in the house and care of ] her. She denied going to Judge Cow i ell to have him change the will or | that Judge CoweM called at the house to settle the claim. Mrs Chapman did . say. however that Judge Cowell "al- t ways carried her over the bridge and | would do so again."
 Mrs Edith Walker. sister of Mrs King. testified she heard Mrs Farnham say somebody ought to see to Mrs | Chipman's affairs. This closed tho ] evidence and the arguments began at 2:15 o'clock