AN OLD MAN’S WILL.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 February 1922, Page 7

AN OLD MAN’S WILL.

CASE WITH EXTRAORDINARY FEATURES.

BLANK PAPER SIGNED AND WITNESSED

‘•PURELY AN EXPERIMENT.” Auckland, Feb. 6. An extraordinary will case was commenced at the Supreme Court to-day. It is an action to “propound in solemn form” the will of John Hattley, an old man of no known relatives, who died at Pukekohe, leaving property valued At about £6OOO to Clyde P. Ludwig. The parties are Clyde Powell Ludwig v. the Public Trustee. Counsel for the plaintiff said that deceased lived alone, and did all h?s own work. His age was unknown, but he probably was over 70. On January 9, 1921, he was found lying on his verandah apparently ill. Some neighbors attended to him, and a doctor was called. William Burden Carter, a farmer,

gave evidence that while waiting outside with Ludwig and a man named McGann, the former remarked that he was to fecoivo all Hartley’s property. Witness heard the doctor asking Hartley if he had any wife or other relations, but could not hear the reply. The doctor asked witness to try to find out from Hartley whether he had any relatives. Witness questioned Hartley, who said that he had no wife, sister, or children. When the doctor returned latter he said to Hartley: “Let’s ■get this will business fixed up,” and asked; if he had a wife or a sister, to which Hartley replied': “No.” At one stage Hartley replied: “Not a soul,” The doctor said: “If I make out a statement will you sign?” Hartley did not reply, but reached but his hand, and took a pen from the doctor and tried to write on a scrap of paper, but without success. Hartley was then asked to make a mark oh the paper, which he did with the doctor's assistance. The paper was then handed to witness for his signature, but when, witness saw thftt it was blank he handed it back, drawing attention to the fact that it was blank. The doctor said: “Well, tear it up.” Witness got a writing-pad and the doctor took a blue form from his bag, and copied from it to the writ-ing-pad, and after reading over what he had -Written asked Hartley to sign. Hartly did so without remark, the doctor steadying his wrist. Witness and the doctor then signed the document also. The document (produced) was the one signed. The doctor took the will with him. To His Honor: Witness did not read over the document which he signed, but from what the doctor read he gathered that, plaintiff was to receive the whole of the property, and the doctor was to be the executor.

To Mr. Ostler: Witness thought that Hartley was quite conscious of what the doctor read to him.

To Dr. Fitchett (for defendant): Witness did not know what happened to the first blank paper signed. The doctor said that the blue paper taken from his hag was a copy of a will form. Hartley’s mark was put to the document after it had been read to Hartley. Witness had never said to anyone that he was satisfied that Hartley did not understand the will. '

Dr. Campbell Smith, jof Pukekohe, said that when he first attended Hartley he found the old man in a very low condition. He asked if he had made a will, and he replied that he had not. Witness asked him if he Would like to make His will, and he said “Yes.” Someone had told witness that Hartley had a wife in Australia, so witness questioned him several times in an endeavor to learn the truth. Hartley said he had no wife, and had not had for about twenty years. Hartley then put his hand on plaintiff’s (Ludwig) neck and said: “That was the boy who was to get all his property.” Hartley repeated the latter statement several times. Plaintiff was present on one. occasion when this statement was made. Witness returned later the same day and found Hartley still weak, but conscious. Since Hartley had expressed a desire to leave his property to. the plaintiff, witness, asked him, if a will were made but to that effect, would he sigh it, and Hartley reached out to sign. But no document had then been made out, so witness handed him a blank paper on which he made, a mark, and then others in thte room placed their signatures there also. This was purely an . experiment,, and need not have been signed by the witnesses. He admitted that it was stupidity. He could hot offer and. reason for the witnesses signing this paper. Several experiments were made on small pieces of paper, all of which were torn up with the exception of the one signed by Carter. When he pulled up at a chemist’s shop at Tuakau two people asked him if Hartley had made a will, and he replied “Yes,” and pulled out of his pocket the piece of paper containing Hartley’s mark and Carter’s signature. The men remarked that it was blank, and witness, suddenly realising that he had no right to display the real will, replied, “I’ve gbt the rest in my head,” and did not show them the proper docu-. ment. When making out. the final document, witness copied from a will form t whifch he always carried. Witness read: the doeutnent and handed Hartley a pencil and assisted him to make his mark on it. Carter and witness then signed the document, which witness put into his pocket. The will was afterwards handed to Mr. Mason, a solicitor, of Pukekohe, and it was at the instruction of the clerk there that a marginal note was made. To Dr. Fitchett: Hartley did not mention Ludwig’s name, but after that individual had been indicated witness was told his name and inserted it in the will. Hearing of the case was adjourned.