Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial. (Wilmington, Del.) 1878-1928, 1922-04-11
SHARPLEy WILL CASE
IN REGISTERS HANDS
Has Taken Under Amusement
Proposition That It be Re-
ferred to a Jury.

Register of Wills Isaac r.. Brown,
yesterday afternoon, finished hearing
argument on the petition of Howard
Il. Springer. Elwell l., Springer, Re-
becca j. Bird and Mary J. Jones for
review Of the probate OF the Will OF
their cousin, Ellwood Frank Sharpley,
decea .ed. and the granting OF letters
testamentary to William T, Lyman
who drew the will. MIR. Brown took
under consideration request that the
case be referred To n jury and told
counsel he will summon them when
he is ready TO render decision.
William S. Hilles. who represented
the propounders OF the will. argued
that the question was whether MIR.
Sharpley was mentally capable Of
making n will.
Referring To Robert G.. Hartman, ut
torney for the petitioners, Mr.. Hilles
said Mr.. Hartman had maligned Mr..
lyman. He declared there was not
the slightest basis for inuendoes made
by Mr.. Hartman and stated Mr.. liar-
man had publicly accused Mr.. I.y-
nam OF things almost too despicable
To mention.
Who would Mr.. Sharpley see II he
came In the courtroom? Mr.. Hilles
asked. No one who has In his veins
any OF Mr.. Sharpley's blood by descent
only n few cousins who are contest
Ing Mr.. Sharpley's will at the expense
ot the character of MIR. Sharpley's
dearest friend--Mr Hillcs replied.
MIR. Lyman had been accused OF
fraud. perjury, everything ConCeiV-
able 10 accuse a wicked man If, MIR.
lIilles stated. From beginning tu end
MIR. Hartman had tried the case as II
he were trying horse thief and on
behalf Of a number of people for whom
MIR. Sharpley did not care thing.
Mr.. Hiles asserted.
This case is different from other
cases. Mr.. Hllles contended. Della
ware law books do not mention one
like e. Distant relatives had COME
in and tried to upset MIR. Sharpley'.
Will
Mr. Hllcs said there was not a
sCintilla OF evidence on which to base
MIR. Ilarman's claims. He admitted
Mr.. Sharpley was sick when the will
evidence that Gods hand had been
laid on MIR. Sharpleys brain or men
tai faculties.
When did Mr.. Sharpley lose the
documentary capacity he had for So
or s. years? Mr.. Hnles asked. Echo
answers when. Mr.. Hilles replied.
Mr.. Hilles argued that Il made no
difference what Mr.. Sharpley's con-
dtton was before and after the max
ing Of the Will II Mr. Sharpley knew
what he was doing and advised Regis
ter Brown not TO heed non professional
opinions regarding Mr.. Sharpley - con
dition II facts did not justify.
Mr.. Hilles suggested that ven O.
charity be thrown over witnesses who
are not busybodies. A the matter
had slept is months before notice al
contest was given there was liability
OF mistake in remembering.
Because or the strong friendship
between Mr.. Lyman and Mr. Sharple,
Il WAS natural for Mr.. lyman TO writ,
Mr.. Sharpley's will, Mr. Hilles thought
Although he has respect for nurses
Mr.. Hilles questioned their ability 70
tell "a hours after a patients admis-
sion 10 a hospital his mental condi-
ton on the day preceding his admis.
sion.
Mr. Hilles likened Mr. lyman and
Mr.. Sharpley to Damon and Pythia.
and said the triumviate was broker
when John NJ. c. Rodney died; there
after the friendship OF Mr. Lyman and
Mr.. Sharpley was stronger
Reviewing the inherent evidence q
he will. Mr.. Hilles declared 1t showed
no lack Of testamentary capacity.
David J. Reinhardt, OF counsel 70
the propounders. analysed the testi-
nony and commented on Attorne,
Harman's orief. He held that an exc
cutor may testify and stated the draw.
ing OF will by beneficiary does not
make IL invalid.
In his final argument Mr.. Harmar
remarked that man who is not in.
sane may be incompetent 10 make 8
Will. Saying insanity did not COME II
the case. he stated the proposition o.