Upon  a  careful  examination  of  all  the  evidence  offered  by
the  caveators  against  the  probate,  I  do  not  think  there  is  a
doubt  cast  upon  the  general  capacity  of  the  decedent  to  make.
a  will  at  the  time  this  pa{>er  was  executed.
The  evidence  of  the  witness  to  the  execution  of  the  paper
propounded,  and  that  of  other  witnesses  examined  to  support
the   decedent's  capacity,  is  most  satisfactory  and  conclusive
on  the  point.     Three  witnesses  were  {)resent  at  the  execution      j
of  the  writing — the  three  subscribing  witnesses,  and  Judg^
Logan,  one  of   the   two   individuals   named   as  executors-
Judge  Logan  was  objected  to  as  incompetent  when  offered  ^
a  witness  before  the  Orphans  Court.    The  objection  was  over-
ruled, anJ  his  testimony  was  taken,  and  reduced  to  writi^8
with  that  of  the  other  witnesses  examined.     No  objecti^^
was  made  to  reading  his  evidence  on  this  appeal;  indeedt   ]
was  used  and  relied  uj)on  by  the  appellees  to  sustain  tU*^^
views  of  the  case.     I  am  not  called  upon,  therefore,  to  ^^'
cide  whether  a  i)erson  who  is  named  as  executor  in  a  will    ^'
competent  as  a  general  witness  to  sustain  it  upon  a  caV«^
filed  against  its  admission  to  probate.
