The Waterbury Democrat. [volume] (Waterbury, Conn.) 1917-1946, 1932-02-29
Bitter Will
Contest Is On
CONTINUED from Page -

stand to testify before Judge slavin.
These witnesses included the Misses
Parsons, Waldron and Horsley.
Mr. Brennan died on November
25th, 1881. Shortly afterwards,
through her counsel, ex.Mayor
Francis p. Guihoile, Mrs Sharkey
asked that her brothers body be
exhumed, claiming that he did not
die Of heart failure while in st
injury sustained at that institution
Mary's hospital but because OF an
in a fall. Subsequent examination
of the body failed to substantfate
her claims.
On November 3Oth, 1881, Mrs
Sharkey produced q will, supposed
to be that Of her brother, Mr. Bren-
nan, giving her all of his estate
with the exception of IS each, to
teh two brothers and one sister.
According to Mrs Sharkey she
procured the will from her SAFETY
deposit vault in the Waterbury
Trust company sometime prior to
its presentation in the probate
court.
witnesses from the Waterbury
Trust conn any to-day testified that
MRS sharkey, according to the re-
cords kept, had not entered the
safe deposit vault to remove the
will for a period of six months
prior t otis presentation in the pro-
bate court. The claim Is made by
the beneficiary under the will that
she procured the will from her safe
deposit vault only a short time be-
fore 1t was presented In the pro-
bate court.
The paper was written on ordi-
merry paper. 1t is claimed by Mrs
Sharkey that her brother wrote the
will on paper he procured In the
fire of the Mulcahy school. This
fire occurred on November 18th.
1914, IS years ago. The deceased
was supposed to have taken home
much paper from the fire and to
have saved It, subsequently writing
out his will on some OF the paper
about 10 years ago.
Lieutenant, Michael Flaherty of
the fire department testified as to
the date of the fire this morning
:, before Judge Slavin. George Cor
coran, proprietor of property on
Scovill street where the deceased
lived. told the court to-day that
even while Mr. Brennan was In the
hospital he maintained his room
with him on Scovill street.
William H. Burt, employment
manager Of the Chase companies,
Inc, placed on the stand by coun-
sci for those appealing. stated that
william J. Lotus, son of the
chief beneficiary from a previous
marriage applied for work at the
Waterbury Manufacturing plant on
February End, 1927, and that his
rate card disclosed the fact that
the applicant had not been work
ing for Is months previous to his
request for work.
The connection of Lotus In the
case was expected to be brought
out ut this afternoons hearing.
Mayor Guilfoile appears for
Mrs sharkey while the other two
brothers and one sister are repre-
scented by Attorneys Patrick and
Frank Healey. This morning.
session was mostly devoted to the
attack on the will by the latter two
named lawyers. .
This afternoon Mr. Turner, u
nationally known handwriting ex-
pert, testified that the Will OF the
deceased, II It was written ID years
ago and on paper Of the sort useu
showed an exceptional state OF
preservation, not only as to the
paper but also as to the ink.
According to Mr. Turner 1t taxes
+, oxidation on blue ink. the color
used, six or seven months to Sc,
in. After 10 years blue ink used
on paper for writing turns to IL
solid black. The Ink on the So
called 13-year-old will Is not solid
black, he testified. According to
Mr. Turner the will Of the de-
ceased could not have been drawn
in 1927 and be in the present con-
dition. Only capitalization has set
in 10 far and this IL an early state
in the showing Of age on the part
/ Of blue ink on paper. according to
the witness. Chemical statistics
were demonstrated and quoted to
support this contention by the wit
ness.