Hide Articles List

25 articles on this Page

-. T DEATH OF A GENERAL.'

CANADA STRIKES OIL.

SHOOTING AT A CYCLIST.

ALLEGED THIEF INJURED.

PRISONER'S DARING ESCAPE.

COSTLY BROKEN AXLE.

-------CHARGE OF STEALING…

YOUTH'S REMARKABLE CAREER.

BANQUET TO LORD KITCHENER…

"COL." LYNCH COMMITTED FOR…

COLONEL FORESTIER-WALKER KILLED.

---ALPINE FATALITIES.

REFITTING II. M.S. LED A.

DAMAGES FOR A JILTED WIDOW.

--------------ACCIDENT TO…

DESTRUCTIVE PKAWN TRAWLING.

----.--WESLEYANS AND DR. BEET.

[No title]

STRANGE WILL CASE. I

News
Cite
Share

STRANGE WILL CASE. I EXTRAORDINARY ALLEGATIONS The case of Blake T. Parker, which has been heard in the Probate Division before Mr. Justice U(V«}11 Barnes, was of a somewhat sensational ••^rurs. It appeared that the plaintiff, Mr. Ilenrj slike, propounded the will of the late George toward Parker, of Seacombe, Cheshire, the will l/dng dated November 24th, 1897, the testatOJ uving died on May 12th, 1901. TIt" defendant .'leaded that the will was not duly executed, and :hat at the time it purported to be executed the leceased was not of sound mind, memory, and Jnderstanding, he being subject to delusions and Jts of violence and mental depression. Lord Coleridge, K.C., and Mr. May appeared for lie plaintiff; Mr. Barnard for the defendant. Henry Blake, examined by Lord Coleridge, said that the testator had said to him that his (the testator's) wife and his son had occupied same room. The son, however, had strongly denied that there had been any sort of immorality. Mr. Barnard, in the course of a brief address, said that unhappiness had first arisen in the home about 1890. The testator had suffered from this unfor- tunate delusion, and believed that wrong was being "ommitted, whereas the son in fact, had sl-pt in :he mother's room to protect her from the testator's violence. The son and mother had felt the absolute necessity of contesting this will because they felt that they must clear their character from this most Ddious charge. Mr. George Abraham Parker, examined by Mr. Barnard, said that the testator was a very violent man, and had treated him very cruelly when he was B. boy. The testator had at. times complained of pains in the head, and said he felt as if a red-hot poker was piercing: Ids brain. He al-o had fits of depression. Immorality had never entered his (wit- ness's) mind, and lie was sure that it could never have entered his mother's. She had asked him to sleep in her bedroom because she was frightened. He slept on her bed and she slept on the floor. He was very surprised when lie read what was in the will; it was, in fact, an "eye-opener." There was no truth whatever that there had ever been any immorality. Cros-examined by Lord Coleridge: He agreed that it was not usual for a grown-up son to sleep in his mother's bedroom. She could have locked the door, but the testator could have got a dupli- cate key. The mother did not suggest that as a reason for the necessity of his sleeping in her room. The witness did not consider that his own bedroom was in hail of his mother's, although they were in the same passage and on the same floor. Mrs. Parker having denied entirely that, there had ever been any immorality between herself and her son, Lord Coleridge, in addressing the court, em- phasised the fact that it was not his case to prove that immorality had taken place, but that there were circumstances which went to shew that the inference the testator drew from them was not such an inference as would indicate that the testator must have been suffering from an insane delusion. To the testator it was "disgusting," as lie himself had put it, that the mother and the grown-up son should be sleeping in the same room, and the con- tention put forward on behalf of the plaintiff was that there was nothing insane in his taking that view, although he might have been wrong as to anything immoral having taken place. Mr. Justice Gorell Barnes, in the course of a very careful review of the evidence, said that the sub- stance of the defence was that the facts shewed that the deceased suffered from a delusion. True it was that the amount in dispute was very small, but to the defendants the importance of the case was considerable, because the will referred in terms to the rcasons why the testator had excluded his widow and his son George from the benefits of the property he had to dispose of, while lie gave the same to his sister and her children. In substance those reasons charged his widow and son with mis- conduct, and he referred also to their persecution of him. The importance, therefore, of that far out- weighed considerations as to the smallness of the estate which was involved in the dispute. The question which the Court had to determine resolved itself into this Was the testator in fact labouring under an insane delusion when he executed his will ? The law to be applied to the facts here was not in doubt, for the delu- sion was clearly one which, if the testator had been labouring under it, would have affected his disposing power, and his mind would not in that case have been free from such a delusion as the law required the the mind of a man to te free from when making his will. It was to his (the learned judge's) mind fairly clearly established that so tar back as 1890 the testator had formed this idea in reference to his wife, but it. that time there could not have been any suggestion as to anything peam-t her and her son. In 1896 the doctors thought that he was labouring under an insane delusion, and it was clear that there was then more than friction existing in the household. He (the learned judge) thought that the mother and son did in that there might be some danger, and that which was done in August of that year was done for that reason. After hearing wtiole of the lie .•greed with the doctor, whose view it had been that when the testator executed the deed of separa- tion he did it in pursuance of his delusion. The proper conclusion f the whole matter, therefore, was that the will was made under an insane delusion as to the conduct of his wife and his son, and it was in fact a delusion without any foundation whatever. The will would accordingly be pronounced against, and costs would be allowed out of the estate.

STRANGE RAT STORY.

A DU At BELL'S BANK SENTENCE.

|RAILWAY REFORM.

DEMANDED CONJUGAL RIGHTS.

[No title]

Advertising