26? OCTOBER TER?, 19??. Op?on o? the Court. 209 U. 8. G?bons, 2 Zab. 1?; C?ll v. D?, 4 B?b. 3?; S?'s E?'s v. ?d, 26 Wend. ?1; Thr?t? v. Ho?, 1? U.S. 552, ? and distin?ed from the ? at ?. Mr. B. F. ? and Mr. C. Cli? Ja? for defen? in e?or ?d ap?H?. MR. CHIEF JUSTXCE FULLER, afar maMng ?e fo?ing sta?ment, delvered the opi?on of the court. ?e con?ntion of ap?llant is that ? ?s?t6x ?d not ?, ?d m the ?ll wm not rc? to her at the ?me of i? execution, it w? therefo? ? ? pre?med that ?e did not ?ow the con?n? of the ? when ?e execu? it, or ?t the ju? ought not to ?ve ?n ?owed to presume from the e?dence pr?uccd ?fore them that ?e ?s?tfix ? ?owl- ed? of the contents of the ?ll. M?. Lipp? brought the ?ll ?th her ? the o? of one of the attesting ?tne?s for the purlin of execution, ?d ? i? execution ?ok it away ?th her, ?d at her d?th it ap?ed in the ?ion of the ?v. Mr. Me?or, the ex?u- tot ?med therein, ?d by whom it w? pro?d? for pr? ba? ?d record. She decla?d to the witness that it wm her ?11, and ?ques? them to at?st it ? such; ?d im pr?om were remonable and nature. She wm sho? ? ? a wom? of instance ?d bu?ne? ?p?ity; she ? in ?y ?d men? heath and ?gor when the i?tmment wm execu?; ?d the? wm no su?stion of fraud or ?due ?fi?n? ? the ?. In them circums?n?s ?he ju? pm?rly conclud? t?t the ?s?tfix ?ew the con?n? of the ? at the time of i? execution, and the co?t ?t we? ?ve ?c? ?ch ?d- ing, u?e? the ?m f?t of the i?b?ty of ?tfix ? ? r?md a leg? presump?on that.?e ?d not ? tMt ?owl- edge, and the abmn? of the ?ng of the ? ? her at ?t time w? fa?. But we ?ow of no such p?ump6on m ?
�
