Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1904-03-31
"S|T DOWN."
Bryan Receives Reprimand in
Bennett Will Hearing.
Sensational Scene, "Wednesday, il
New Haven Court.
i1ehraskan Fighting for Fortune of
Fifty Thousand Dollars.

| New Haven, Conn. March 30.-The
superior court room was again crowded
with an interested audience, today,
when the hearing of the appeal of VIM.
}. Bryan from the decision of the pro-
| bate court excluding the famous fifty
! thousand dollar "sealed letter. as a
part OF the will of p. s. Bennett was
| continued. MIR. Bryan was not in the
court room when todays proceedings
opened, but was expected to come in
| later in the day. Mrs. Bennett tn.
widow OF the testator, had a seat near
her counsel.
| The argument of eX-Judge Stoddard,
| counsel for Mrs. Bennett ana other
| heirs regarding the admissibility of the
| scaled letter as evidence was COM
pleted. yesterday aftrnoon, but was fol-
lowed, today, by Il brief address in
which the attorney reviewed the main
points, tie jury being meanwhile ex-
cused. EX-Judge StOddard laid special
| emphasis on the assertion that the
| courts of this country and Englant.
have never admitted Il document like
teh sealed letter" and he referred to
many authorities and decisions.
| THE fact that the letter was signed
by the testator makes no difference in
4 case OF this character he said. 1T
is not part of the will. was not proper
ly executed and if allowed to be en-
tered in this court will be contrary to
| all law in Connecticut fromcd to pro-
hibit fraud, undue influence and i'm,
position"
Continuing. Mr.. StoGdard contended
| that the letter was not properly attest
er by three witnesses and was not de-
scrbed in the will as being 4 part of
the will. 1T is apparent he said.
that this paper was never intended to
be part of Mr.. BENEFITS will. Coun-
sci for the other side will say that this
paper was contcmporaneous with the
will. Where Il paper is executed ut the
same time at which the will is exc
cuted why does not the party make it
Il part Of the Will? 1t is clearly ap-
| parent that there has been no intention
to do So
| Judge Stodari quoted from the letter
that part which says that the letter
was to be read by the widow alone and
asked DO you mean to say that this
document was ever intended to be
spread on the public records y Read
by YOU alone There is nothing in that
which can possibly be construed as be-
ing a technical part of the testament OF
| Mr.. Bennett. 1t was 4 letter Of in
structions the very terms of which
show it cOnclusively."
| A sensational incident occurred when
| Mr.. Stoddard in the course of his al
Gumcnt declared that tie sealed letter did
not express the truth and did not repre-
sent the sentiments of NJ. Bennett. Mir.
| Bryan. VINO had entered the court room
a short time before. jumped to his feet
! imme diately and started to speak, but
| was interrupted by Mr.. Stoddard. who
said with great emphasis that Mr. Bryan
was hiding behind a subterfuge in this
important matter" and that it was about
time Mr. Bryan said something.
! Mr.. Stoddard referred to certain letters
| which are said to have passed between
| Mr.. Bryan and Mr.. Bennett but while
| Mr.. Bryan was still trying to get an OPP
portunity to speak the court ruled that
all preference to the letters mentioned
were inadmissiblc at this time. Mr. Bry-
an insisted on being heard, however, say
ing:
Your honr. Judge Stoddard has made
a statement that is contrary to fact and
| wish to rcpudate it. 1t must be stated
right
| The cour replied: Mr.. Bryan
should think you ought to know that
when the court has made ruling YOU
cannot break it. Please sit down.
! Mr.. Bryan: Yes. your honor" He
| then seated himself and Mr.. Stodd2rd was
allowed an objection.
| The letters referred to are known as
| exhibits + and G in this case and said
to contain an announcement of the inten-
ton Of Mr.. Bennett to withdraw the let
| ter he had already written in which he
| had expressed wish that Mr. Bryan
| should have $4,000 from his estate
At the hearing in probate it was stated
that although Mr.. Bennett at one time
desired Mr.. Bryan to have 500 900 mac
cordance with the terms OF the scaled
letter he had changed his intention ami
had he lived would sooner or later have
withdrawn the letter which is now III
controversy.
When Judge Stoddard had concluded his
address he was followed by Attorney
Hewitt on behalf of the appellants, who
quoted from several cases in which the
same conditions existed as in this case
and made a strong plea for his side.
AT the conclusion of his argument a
recess was taken.
During the recess VIM Perkins, the
driver of the stage in which Mr. Ben
nett was riding when he was killed in
Idaho, appeared in the court room. He
will be a witness.
When the session was resumed. At
torney Newton, one of Bryan's coun-
sci, began an argument for the admis-
sion of the sealed letter" as evidence
Mr.. Newton declared that Mr.. Ben
nett certainly intended that the sum of
$4,000 should go to Mr.. Bryan
"Shculd Mr.. Bryan refuse it," he said,
Mr.. Bennett intended that the money
should be divided for educational and
charitable purposes
Referring apparently to the colloquy
between MIR. Bryan and Judge Stod-
dard earlier in the day, Mr.. Newton
said:
We protest against the charges that
Mr.. Bryan is trying to get this $4,000
Continued on page 2)