The Morris County chronicle. [volume] (Morristown, N.J.) 1877-1915, 1905-04-18
A CONTESTED WILL CASE.
In Which the Testator'- Dying Wishes
We're Upheld by the Court.

Were Upheld by the Court
1T is moot question in these later
DAYS whether or no a person accumu-
lating property can effectively in de-
yising such property tunder statutory
provisions) express himself in his last
viii so that his wishes shall be carried
out in their full spirit.
Fundamentally, it would seem to be
an inherent right OF each and every
person accumuIating substance that
he Tor she) have the power to dispose
Of it according to his personal views.
The laws provide that the interests of
the testator's immediate family shall
to a. certain extent be conserved, but
that under this statutory safeguard
the general import Of the will shall be
maintained the same power Of
conveyance exists after his death In
bis written will as though he were
alive and personally able toenforce its
provisions.
This theory, sound in principle, at
times appears to be carried off its bal
ance. The attempts to inyalidate a
will by certain heirs or legatees who
desire TO grasp an undue portion of a
decedent's property to the exclusion
of other natural and rightful claims
are altogether too numerous, especial
ly when the instrument is contested
on the grounds of undue influence,
senility or mental incompetency.
Where such conditions are proven the
courts are generally competent to
make proper disposition of the case.
Morris county has had it's share of
contested will cases. Three or four
years ago the Davenport will case had
an airing. 1t was bitterly contested
suit, costing thousands of dollars.
The caveators did not come out exact
ly first best at the final Judgment
and the estate had to bear the burden.
Another Morris county case which
recently has attracted much attention
is that of the late Mrs. Pauline Hum
mel, wife of f. f. Hummel, editor
and proprietor of the Dover Index"
who died last fall and whose will was
admitted to probate on March 81 last.
The details are few and closely con-
nected. Mrs. Hummel at about the
time of her marriage with Mr.. Hum
mel gave her two sons by a former
marriage Daniel j. and George w.
Backoff "a goodly share Of property
seised in her own name together with
certain personal property, amounting
to some $4,000. Other real estate sit
uated in Dover in which she had but
"a life interest also went to them
There was the usual objection on the
part of the sons to the marriage, but
Mrs. Hummel was at that time men
tally and physically competent, and
their objections went for naught.
She had been i'll for number of
months just preceding her death. and
feeling that her earthly end was draw
ing nigh, some two days before her
demise she summoned lawyer Eugene
]. Cooper, of Dover, to her home and
instructed him to draft will deyising
her remaining property to her hus-
band as a tribute of gratitude for his
kindly and unwearied attendance on
her many wants and needs during her
long months Of sickness.
This will was attacked on the ground
that the testator was mentally and
physically incompetent to make a will
Several hearings were had and con-
siderable moral obtuseness was shown
on the part of certain witnesses lin
fact SO much so that the evidence in
troduced by the cayeators went for
naught
The viii was sustained by the court.
The caveators could show neither
legal nor natural right to the estate
conveyed in the will. AS to the family
question, the sons had never contrib
uted to che support Of their mother,
but on the contrary she had to GER
tain degree enriched them.
1t should be highly satisfactory to
the general public that the last de-
sireS Of a dying person as expressed in
a valid viii are sustained BY ghe|