Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1900-1911, 1908-02-01
CARITHERS' FORMER
WILL IN EVIDENCE
CONTESTANTS WIN DECIDED
POINT
Trial Has Already Occupied More
Time Than Expected, and Court
VIII Meet an Hour
Earlier Today

Proceedings in the Carithers con-
tested will case promise to extend far
beyond the time originally set for the
trial in the superior court, which was
two days, and 1t is believed that three
more days will be added to the three
already taken up. For that reason
the trial will begin at 9 o'clock this
morning, instead of 10 o'clock, Judge
Bordwell stating that the case had all
ready occupied more time than was
commensurate with the congeSted con-
ditions Of the calendar.
The most important feature yester-
day was the reading to the jury of the
will executed by William D. Carithers
on May g. 1906, and which, the contest
ants claim, contains an expression of
his wish how his estate should be dis
tributed. The introduction of this will
has been a matter for great deal of
contention, and the placing of it in the
evidence is looked upon as a decided
point in favor of those who are seek
ing to break the will of August IS,
1906, which left practically the whole
estate to the widow, Della A. Carithers,
and small portion to sister. Mrs.
Mary Hipsley of Table Grove, Ill.
In the older will the estate is divided
among a number of relatives, persons
who have come to Los Angeles from
Illinois in the hope of securing what
they believe to be their rightful share.
The widow, by the terms of the will, Is
given the t2mily residence at 1922 Reed
street and $4,000, and sums of money
ranging from 500 to $4,000 are left to
other relatives, with the exception of
a nephew, who is given 1900 acres of
land in Kansas. William L. Hipsley
and Benjamin Mccartney are named
as executors, without bond.
Helm First Witness
Lynn Helm, an attorney, who drew
up the will in August, was the first
witness yesterday. He said he be-
lieved Carithers was sound in mind on
the day he signed this will, and de-
clared he did not place it in type
written form because the document
was already signed. He was shown
the two signatures OF Carithers on the
will and asked to spell one that had
been written Illegally.
"Wm. D. Carr-Car-" began the
witness, but was stopped by the con-
testant's attorney.
Nov, you said two RS; are there
two in the name?
st can't say" replied the witness.
mo, thought not" said the attor-
ney, with sarcasm.
Helm said he did not know whether
the name was spelled wrong; all he
knew was that Carithers wrote 1t.
L. M. Vogel, who was witness to
the latter will, was the next witness.
He said he met Carithers shortly after
arriving in Los Angeles in May 1906,
and the two had become intimate
friends. Except at times when
Carithers was under the influence of
liquor he said his mind was clear
and he was fully able to transact
business. He had taken Carithers to
an institute for the purpose of curing
him of the drink habit and had
watched over him later while in hos
pitaI in Los Angeles, instructing the
hospital officers and nurses not to let
friends see the old man.
Vogel declared ne did not believe
Carithers was under the influence of
liquor when the will was signed. He
said he did not know what the former