Norwich bulletin., 1922-03-09
ATTORNEY WHO DREW WILLS
SAYS MRS. LUTHER SANE

the late Mrs. Augusta L. Luther, wid-
CIV of Capt. Joseph Luther of New
London. for 50 years and he was alb
solutely sure she was sane and of tes-
tementary. capacity when she executed
two wills, that were drawn by the
attorney.
Attorney Tanner was the principal
witness Tuesday and Wednesday at |
the trial of the appeal from probate
of the will of Mrs. Luther in which |
Mrs. Harriet S. Devereux of Portland,
Me-, and others are trying to break |
the will.
He declared he never tried to find
out if Mrs. Luther was insane because
he never had any suspicion that she |
was
Going back to 1917, when Mrs. Luz
Their made a will, Attorney Tanner |
was asked if he knew the subject of /
that will and why she was making the |
will. Mr.. Tanner said that he did not |
know why she was making the will. |
He said that Captain Luther, who was
with her, did not participate" in the |
making of the will but that ''he did |
take part in the conversation ane that |
the most he had to say was in APP
proval of what Mrs. Luther had to !
say"
Attorney Tanner declared that Cap
tain Luther at that time said that he
did not wish any of his money to go
into the family of his wife The wit
ness testified that he did not know
that all her money came from Cap
tain Luther, in fact he didn't know
much about it,
The witness said that the number
of beneficiaries in the 1917 will were
about the same as in the 1890 will
and that the beneficiaries were indi-
Gated by Mrs. Luther. He admitted
that he suggested making codicil to
the 1917 will when she came in 1920
to have a new will made out but Mrs.
J Luther declared that she wanted a
new draft.
In redirect examination by Attorney
Charles B.. Waller for the appellee, At
torney Tanner said that the bequest
to Armstrong in the 1917 will was
larger than it was in the 1929 will.
to the best of his recollection the be-
quest in the former was 5000, and in
the latter it was $4,000.
In his testimony Tuesday Attorney
Tanner declared that he made two
wills for Mrs. Luther one in 1917 and
one in February, 1920. Her husband
was with her both times and the wit
ness declared that Mrs. Luther was of
sound mind.
Under cross examination Attorney
Tanner said that there were two or
three names in the 1917 will which
were left out of the 1920 will and
two or three names were put into
the 1920 will which were not in the
1917 will. He said that Mrs Luther
had the 1917 will with her when she
came to his office to have her VII
made out in 1920 but that he could
not remember whether she DESTROYED
1t at the time So far as he knew
she took it with her.
He said that he never saw the 1917
document since then and he next saw
the 1920 will at the probate office in
June, 1921, when it was admitted to
i, probate. The witness said that he did
not know where Mrs. Luther kept the
1917 will and he did not know where
she kept the 1920 will
Search for the Will
Attorney Tanner admitted that some
time after Mrs. Luther's death he
went to the Luther house in Broad
: street where search was made 70,
another will. Mr.. Tanner fixed the time
of visiting the house some time dur.
ing the week between continued hear.
, ings of the probate court. He said tina
! he accompanied Attorney Nathan Bel
cher, who looked around for a will
later than the 1920 will. The witness
who said that he was personal coun
! sci for the executor, denied lookin:
!. FOR a tin box or any other kind o
e receptacle containing another will.
Attorney Tanner would not testff-
that Mrs. Luther had "cut" ANYBODY
name from any will and said that al
he knew about it was what Mrs. LII
ther told him to put in the will
which he wrote out according to he
directions. She did not say at tn
e time she was cutting anybody out o
f the will. He said that he had no COP,
or any memoranda Of either the 1871
r or 1920 wills.
s The witness recalled that the nam
o of a Mr.. Maxson, which was in tn
}. 1917 will, had been left out of the 1872
: will. He did not know whether 1t wa
e Charles L. Maxson or not but he di
know that he drove Mrs. Luther's ma
r chine before Mr.. Armstrong Attorne
Tanner did not remember that Mrs
Maxson's name had been in the 191
viii and had been left out of the late
will. but he did recollect the name o
Miss Sweet being left out of the 1872
will. He also declared that he i'd 10
recall that Mr.. and Mrs. Maxson'
i daughter nad Deen lett out.
8 Attorney Tanner testified that Nj
r and Mrs. Armstrong; daughter, Muri
s ell, who was left $1,000 and a plan
n in the 1920 will, was not in the 1s1
will, but he could not recollect an
s other names which were not in tn
# 1917 will and were in the 1920 will
although it is ossible that there wer
others. He declared that he did nc
hear Mrs. Luther or Captain Luthe
say anything about her immedt
relatives when she was at his offic
in 1920.
After Attorney Tanner had left tn
.e sand Wednesday Richard B. Wall {
IT New London testified to being -ealle
" up to Mr.. Tanners office in TIE Lyrt
Hall building from the store in tn
same building, where he was a booh
keeper, to witness a will. When h
went into the office of Attorney Tar
ner there were present Capt and Mr.
Luther, Attorney Tanner and Miss Dc
vail, stenographer in Attorney Geo e
- G. Morgan S office. Mr.. Wall said tn;
~ he saw Mrs. Luther sign the WILL bl
~ did not recall that Mrs. Luther mac
II any statement. He testified that /
did not know Mrs. Luther or Captai
"a Luther except by sight, but he talke
with her that day, when she compl
mented him on historical s'-~tch,
which he had written. Mr.. Wall sa
he thought Mrs. Luther was OF SOU
mind.
Mrs. Marguerite ]. Learson of Phi
adelphia, formerly Miss Devall, sa
as that she was stenographer for Attol
. ney Morgan on the da.r Mrs. Luth,
-