Will—Capacity to Make.—Under the Statutes of California every person over the age of eighteen years may by last will dispose of his or her estate, provided he or she is of sound mind and free from undue influence, duress, or fraud.

Will.—The Tests of Testamentary Capacity are: 1. Understanding of what the testator or testatrix is doing; 2. How he or she is doing it; 3. Knowledge of his or her property; 4. How he or she wishes to dispose of it; and 5. Who are entitled to his or her bounty.

Will—When Capacity Lacking.—It is not Enough that the testator or testatrix have a mind sufficient to comprehend one of the above elements; his or her mind must be sufficiently clear and strong to perceive the relation of the various elements to one another, and he or she must have at least a general comprehension of the whole.

Will—Immature Mental Development of Testator.—Although a person may not be subject to delusions or mental aberrations, nor suffering from active insanity nor entirely destitute of understanding, yet he or she may not have arrived at that maturity of mind which qualifies him or her to make a will and is deficient in testamentary capacity.

Will—Minimum Age Limit of Testator.—A testator or testatrix need not be expected to know the exact legal scope and bearing of his or her will, but should have sufficient faculty to understand generally his or her circumstances and natural obligations. The age of eighteen years in this state is fixed as the minimum limit at which that faculty is developed in a normal nature; in some other states and countries it is twenty-one.

Will—Mentally Undeveloped Testatrix.—A woman who has reached the age of eighteen may make a will if she be otherwise qualified, but she may have arrived at this age without having emerged in mental growth from childhood. This does not import a disordered intellect or diseased mind, and is entirely consistent with the general fact that the family of the decedent was composed of persons of sound and strong mentality, and that her inherent traits were intellectually perfect, there being no suggestion of insanity in the blood. It is also consistent with the fact that the decedent was a woman in the full bloom of health; fully nourished bodily, with no serious corporal ailment, no congenital incapacity, physically a perfect woman, but short on intellect.

Will—Evidence Willfully Suppressed Presumed to be Adverse.—It is a satisfactory presumption that evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced.

Will—Presumption in Favor of—Beneficiaries Entitled to Protection. In the absence of testimony to the contrary there is a presumption in favor of the validity of a will, and the beneficiaries of a will are as much entitled to protection as any other property owners, the due execution of the will being admitted.

Will—A Will Does not Prove Itself.—Even if there be no contest ef a will, certain essential facts must be established before it is admitted, and these facts should be carefully inquired into on the original probate. In all cases of olographic wills the handwriting must be proved affirmatively by or on behalf of the proponent.

Will—Contest—Evidence—Burden of Proof.—While it would be incumbent on the proponent, if there were no contest, in a case such as the one at bar, to establish the authenticity of the handwriting of the •decedent in the will, which is holographic, and the circumstances of the execution of the document to the extent of her knowledge, yet it is true, in a sense, that the burden of proof rests upon the contestant and he must bear his own burdens as to the issues set up by him; ■and where it is not denied that the instrument is in the handwriting of decedent, so far as the contest is concerned, it is incumbent upon him to prove a negative, that she was not competent; that the will was not the voluntary emanation of her own mind, or that she was not free from circumstance of constraint. Any one of these facts-established justifies the contest, but does not relieve the proponent ultimately from her burden of establishing all the ele'ments necessary to entitle her to letters testamentary.

Will.—A Holographic Will must be Proved, in the Same Manner as other private writings; that is, by one who saw the writing executed or by evidence of the genuineness of the handwriting of the maker, or by a subscribing witness.

Will Contest—Issues—Unsoundness of Mind and Undue Influence— Consistency of Issues.-—In a will contest the issues of unsoundness of mind of the testatrix and undue influence exerted upon her are not inconsistent. While these issues are distinct as a rule, there may be a ease where a person of immature intellect may be so influenced by one of superior power as to direct the manual performance of the mechanical act.

Will Contest—Evidence—Circumstances Before and After AdmisBible.—In such a case, the evidence should not be confined to the point of time of the testamentary act alone; it is proper to allude to the surroundings of the decedent at the time of making the will and for the years prior and subsequent thereto.

Will Contest—Evidence—Credibility of Witnesses.—In such a ease, in determining the credibility of witnesses who testify as to the mental competency of the testatrix, their opportunities, their intimacies, their relations to the parties, and many other major, and minor elements, must be considered before accepting as absolute their opinions upon a matter of such moment as the mentality of a person.

Will—Testamentary Capacity—Ability to Speak Several Languages. The fact that the testatrix in such a case was able to speak in several languages is not in itself proof of intellectual power.

Will—Mental Capacity—Undue Influence—Justness of Will.—While, if the testatrix be of sound mind, it matters not whether her will be equitable or inequitable, just or unjust, as she has the right to do as she pleases with her property, nevertheless, equity, justice, the relations of the parties, the surroundings of those benefited in connection with the testatrix and other points may be considered in connection with the transaction, where the competency is questioned or susceptibility to influence suggested.

Will—Mental Capacity—Undue Influence—Ignoring Benefactor.— In such a case the improbability of a person ignoring or discriminating against one who has been of great service to her for many years- and who had conserved her estate without the diminution of a dollar, on the contrary with increase and without retaining anything for personal benefit, is a proper subject of inquiry, as to whether if she were of full faculty and free from the impediment of influence she would have done otherwise; and it might be inferable that those who had been in close propinquity and who were the beneficiaries of her bounty had improved their opportunities to their own advantage.

Will—Mental Capacity—Ability of Testatrix to Write.—The mere fact that one can write does not imply soundness of mind; and in a case like the one at bar the circumstances must be considered and inquiry made into all the facts and history, and the conduct and surroundings of the person whose mental condition is at issue, before passing judgment. . .

Will Denied Probate.—It is Held in This Case that the paper propounded should be refused and denied probate.