Perhaps very few legal questions have given rise to more controversy than that of the admissibility of parol evidence to show the intent of a testator. An interesting phase of the general question was presented to the supreme court of errors of Connecticut in the recent case of Stearns v. Stearns, (Conn. 1925) 130 Atl. 112. Parol evidence was offered to show that the testatrix intended to devise and bequeath all the residue and remainder of her estate to her husband and that instructions were so given to the scrivener but he failed to draft the will in accordance with his instructions by omitting the words "and real". The court held the evidence inadmissible and on page 115 of the opinion said: "The rule is, we believe, universal, that parol evidence of intent cannot be admitted to supply a possible defect or omission in a will occurring through mistake or inadvertence whether of the testator or the scrivener."