274 ANNUAL REGISTER, 1814. 



REMARKABLE TRIALS AND LAW CASES. 



TES'I AMENTA RY CAUSES. 



Arches Court, Doctors' -Com- 

 mons, Friday, Mai/20. — Adams v. 

 Kneebone. — This was a case of 

 appeal from the Consistorial Court 

 of Exeter, brought by Mr. Tho- 

 mas Adams, the brother and sole 

 executor of the will of Mr. Tho- 

 mas Adams, late of St. Winnon, 

 in Cornwall, deceased, against Eli- 

 zabeth, the wife of Mr. Thomas 

 Kneebone, the niece and adminis- 

 tratrix of the effects of Mrs. 

 Jemfer Adams, the widow of the 

 deceased. The suit was originally 

 instituted in the Court of Exeter, 

 by Mrs. Kneebone, in impeach- 

 ment of the validity of the will of 

 Mr. Thomas Adams; and the 

 Judge of that Court, upon the 

 evidence there taken, pronounced 

 against its validity, and revoked 

 the probate which had been 

 granted ; from which decision, 

 the present appeal to this Court 

 was prosecuted by Mr. Thomas 

 A<iam8, the executor. 



The will in question was con- 

 tained in two papers, both of them 

 dated the 16th of May, 1799 ; the 

 first, attested by Dr. Hall, the 

 physician, who attended the de- 

 ceased, and Mr. Philip Carnsew, 

 a hair-dresser> who lived in the 

 neighbourhood ; and the second 

 by Carnsew, and two neighboure 

 of the names of Solomons and 

 Curteys. Mr. Adams died three 



days after the execution of these 

 papers. The effect of both was 

 pretty nearly the same, that of 

 making a small provision for the 

 testator's wife, but bequeathing 

 the greater part of his property to 

 his brother Thomas and his family, 

 and appointing him executor; 

 there was, however, a clause giv- 

 ing the residue of the property to 

 Mr. Thomas Adams in the latter 

 will, which there was not in the 

 prior one. A probate was ob- 

 tained of this latter will, in which 

 all the testator's relatives appeared 

 to acquiesce, no proceedings being 

 taken to impeach its validity for 

 7 years afterwards. In Septem- 

 ber, 1806, Dr. Hall, who took the 

 deceased's instructions for and pre- 

 pared the first will, (from which 

 the second was prepared by an at- 

 torney), died, and in October 

 following, proceedings were in- 

 stituted by some of the deceased's 

 relatives, calling upon the executor 

 to bring in the probate, and prove 

 the will by witnesses; but in Jar 

 nuary following, the first will, 

 which had never till then made 

 its appearance, was found to be in 

 the possession of Mr. Philip Carn- 

 sew, one of the witnesses, and the 

 proceedings were shortly after^ 

 wards discontinued. From tbi» 

 time the executor continued in un- 

 disturbed possession of the probate 

 until . December, 181), when Mrsti 

 Kneebone, as the admirastretliK of 



