Show C COURT T HEARS fA S SS I BRYANS S APPEAL l lIt It U is on Exclusion of the Sealed Scaled Letter Jetter as Part of the Bennett Will WAS IT INTENDED AS SUCH Counsel for Mrs Irs Dennett and anil Heirs Argues That It Never Was as Now New Haven Conn March 30 The hearing hell ring of at the of at William J 1 Dryan from tram tho th decision lon of ot the probate te court excluding the sealed let letter letter ter tot ns liS n a pert part of ot the will vill o of It S 8 Bennett Dennett was as continued today In the superior court I counsel for Mrs Dennett and other hell heirs regarding the admissibility of or the tho scaled seabed letter today toda supplemented hIt his argument of ot yesterday by a brief brier ad address a address dress In which he lie reviewed the main points the Jury being meanwhile ex cx excused Mr Ir Stoddard laid special I em on oi tho the assertion that tho the courts of ot this country and England have never admitted a II document like the tho sealed scaled letter and he Ito referred to many au authorities authorities and decisions decision The tact fact that the tho letter was by II tho the makes makel no difference In u n vase of ot this lila character ho said It IH III not a part of or the tha will was vas not properly executed ami an If It allowed to be entered In iii this court would be contrary to all law In Connecticut framed to pro fraud undue and 1051 position tion Continuing Mr Stoddard contended d that tho Ito letter was WaR as not lIot properly attest n ed ell by b tho thu witnesses and won not nol de IC In tho lie will as al being a part of the will willIt It Is III apparent he lie Pard that lint this paper was never Intended to III bo be a n tart part of Mr Mv II will Counsel for tho the other will tray soy an that this paper was contemporaneous with tho the will 1111 Where a n paper Is executed at lit tho ho same canto time nt et which tho hue willis will Is executed why does doC not tho the party make It II n a part palt of the lie will It ItIs ItIs Itis Is clearly apparent that there hero has been no Ito Intention to do ib HO so Judge Stoddard quoted front from the let letter ter tot that part which says sas that thit the let letter letter letter ter wn was WAA to be bo rend by the widow aloM arid and n ik d Do Dr you OU mean menn to 10 nay Bay that lint this document was as ever Intended to bit UtI spread on tho Ito public records Head by I you yell alone Thero There Is nothing In that which can possibly bo lie construed an M being n a technical part of ot the tho tonIc testa testament t ment of ot Mr fr l It U yes was a R letter of or Instruction tho the very sery terms ot of which show sho It A sensational Incident occurred when Mr In hI the course of hula ar or argument Kliment declared that tho time sealed scaled letter did not express 14 tho the truth and did not lint represent the tho sentiments of ot Mr who hind hall entered tho the court courtroom room loom a I short time before jumped to his feet teet Immediately and 1 started to speak but was wa Interrupted by Mr Mv h Stoddard who said sahl with great grent em enu emphasis that Mr fr was hiding be hind a II subterfuge In iii this Important matter matteI mind that th t It was suns about tinie Mr Ir said alel something Mr dard ilard referred to certain letters which are aro mid cald to have huaso passed between Mr Ir Bryan Dryan and Mr Mm It Bennett Dennett but while Mr Bryan was wn still trying to get liet an op opportunity opportunity to tho lie court ruled that all 1111 reference to the letters mentioned was Ivan no Inadmissible at nt this time Mr Bryan Insisted on being heard however saying Your honor Judge has hns made n a statement that Is contrary to n II tact fact and I 1 wish to repudiate It It must be stated right The court replied Mr Bryan n I 1 should think that blunt you OU ought to know that when the thc court hits made a ruling you cannot go and break u It Please sit down Mr Bryan thereupon seated himself lf and Judge Stoddard was WOR allowed an oh cli The rhe letters Jetter referred to are aro said to contain an announcement of the In III Intention mu or of Mr Ir Hennett to withdraw tho the letters he had written In which he hue ex cx expressed pressed a II wish that hint Mr Ir should have havo OOOO from his hl estate 8 tl In the blue hearing In tho the probate to court It was stated that although lilt hough Mr Bennett Dennett at lit one ono time Desired Mr to have In imi accordance with the Onus ot of the sealed letter ho lie had changed his hilt Intention anti onel had believed he would sooner BOoner or Inter later have withdrawn the Iho letter which In is now In iii controversy con When Judge hind had concluded d his address ho lie was WM followed by h Attar Attorney ney ne lie Hewitt on behalf of tho thu appel alIel appellants lants who quoted tom front aVeral criers onsen In which hn he h claimed the hue mum couch condi conditions lions tiOn existed ns as In tn thus this east cas t anti and made madea a II strong lit l Ien hea for his side Attorney Newton one of or Mr Ir Bryans counsel argued for tor the of ot the letter rut tut evidence Ho Ht eon con contended tended that lint Mr Bennett Dennett certainly In that the sum sunt of or should go to Mr nr nn Should Mr IIran refuse retus It he h sold paid Mr Ir Bonnett Intended that hint the tho money should 10 ho divided for tur educational ami a Situ III I charitable purposes We Wo protest against the tho charge that Mr Ir Is in trying to got get this for tor himself and aini ns liS his hili attorneys It i Is in our duty to say lIay thirst that It has been his luI purpose to fulfill the lie trust manila made by b Mr Sir Bennett Hennett to the letter lAtter |