12.  A  testator  more  than  seventy  years  of  age  was  confined  to
his  bed  by  an  inflammatory  disease  of  a  very  distressing  nature,
and  of  which  he  died  in  two  days  after  the  will  was  made.  When
in  health  he  often  resisted  the  appeals  of  a  second  wife,  by  whom
he  had  no  children,  to  make  a  will,  and  declared  often,  and  up  to
within  three  weeks  of  his  death,  that  he  would  make  no  will,  and
was  at  the  time  of  making  the  alleged  will  in  a  partial  stupor,  and
when  aroused  was  flighty.  He  devised  all  his  estate  to  his  wife
and  one  son,  and  his  will  was  held  invalid.  Harrell  v.  Harrell,  1
Duv.  204,  205.
13.  The  mere  fact  that  a  will  had  been  drawn  up  by  those  in-
terested in  its  provisions,  without  the  request  of  the  testator,  will
not  of  itself  invalidate  it,  but  would  be  a  strong  circumstance
against  its  validity.     Jones  v.  Jones,  14  B.  Mon.  474.
14.  Such  influences  as  arise  from  legitimate  social  relations  must
be  allowed  to  produce  their  natural  results,  even  on  last  wills  and
testaments,  and  there  can  be  no  presumption  of  its  unlawful  exer-
cise merely  from  the  fact  that  it  existed,  and  may,  to  some  extent,
have  operated  on  the  testator's  mind.     Such  influences  naturally


524  WILLS.
produce  inequality  in  wills,  but  a  will  is  not  on  that  account  to  be
condemned.  It  is  only  wbere  such  influence  is  exercised  over  the
very  act  of  devising,  so  as  to  prevent  the  will  from  being  really
the  act  of  the  testator,  that  the  law  condemns  it  as  a  vicious
element  of  the  testamentary  act.  Sechrest  v.  Edwards,  4  Met
174.
