“I just rode in one of them, however,” she added. “The office girl rides in them most of the time.”
Dr. Smith stated in his bill that his wife had an ungovernable temper and that she called up his patients and advised them not to consult him. The doctor further stated that these and other things ruined his health and his business.
Mrs. Smith was given the decree.
RECEIVERSHIP PROCEEDINGS
Chicago Tribune
Inflated reports of sales by managers of branch houses, extending over a period of three years, and resulting in a misleading annual statement, it was said yesterday, were responsible for the receivership proceedings for Robert Z. Link & Co.
The Chicago banks which were the principal creditors of the corporation discovered the character of these statements a few days ago in an audit of the books, and at once took steps to protect creditors.
The other explanation advanced for the crisis in the company’s affairs came from Secretary William H. Arthur.
“In the panic last fall,” he declared, “poor people, who are the firm’s principal customers, could not afford to buy even the cheapest fish. They became vegetarians. If we could have tided over our financial difficulties until after Lent we would have weathered the storm. Trade was just beginning to pick up.”
Developments of the day were as follows:
Receiver William T. Harrison, learning that fish, oysters, and other sea foods were lying in the cars, took measures to obtain the fullest powers in conducting a business based upon transactions in perishable products.
Four Chicago banks that hold nearly $2,500,000 of the firm’s paper, some of it accepted two months ago, held a conference and discussed reorganization of the company.
Minority creditors prepared to organize.
Efforts were made to find out what the company did with the proceeds of $1,000,000 worth of preferred stock issued last October. Officials say it was used to take up short term notes and to buy warehouses and plants to prevent competition. Creditors believe exorbitant sums were paid for the plants.
Ancillary receivers were appointed for branch plants of the company in various parts of the country.
Receiver Harrison issues a statement practically exonerating Link brothers for blame for the financial straits of the Company.
An official of one of the four Chicago banks which hold nearly $2,500,000 of the firm’s paper said that the receiver was appointed after the banks had learned that some persons connected with Robert Z. Link & Co. had issued misleading statements concerning its volume of business. The Link brothers are not believed to have known anything about these false statements.
The company, it appears, has a number of ambitious managers of its branch houses in various parts of the country. Each manager gets a percentage on his total sales. Some of them, to obtain the commission, it is asserted, juggled their reports in such a manner that their total sales appeared to be much larger than they really were, and the annual report was in consequence misleading. The company had no system of checking up these reported sales, and it was not until the bankers put an auditing firm upon the books, after they suspected something following the issuance of the last annual statement, that the discrepancies were discovered.
The fact that the last annual statement does not account for new money, the proceeds of the last stock issue, also is being investigated.
Secretary Arthur had a different explanation to make.
“The panic of last fall, and vegetarianism to which the poor were reduced when thrown out of employment,” he declared, “are responsible for most of our troubles.
“It is a well known fact that the company supplied two-thirds of the oysters, fish, and all sea food eaten in this country. The bulk of this trade is among poor people. The company’s chief business has been in fish that retails at 8, 10, and 15 cents a pound, especially in large cities. We depended most upon our business in fresh water fish—the largest in the world in herring, lake perch and such cheaper varieties. This trade came from working people.
“When the working people were thrown out of employment and stopped buying fish, our trade fell off tremendously. It has just begun to pick up, and if the bankers had not taken alarm and had given us a little more time, we should have come out all right.”
Mr. Arthur said that the $1,000,000 acquired in the last issue of preferred stock had mostly gone to pay short term notes.
Receiver Harrison in the afternoon went to Lake Geneva to hold a conference with Judge Kohlsaat, who had been originally selected as the judge before whom the receivership proceedings were to be held.
“I wish to secure the fullest authority for conducting the business, which is based so largely upon perishable products, so that there will be no loss,” said Mr. Harrison. “I already have that power, but I want to have it specified more clearly.”
Representatives from several railroads called on Mr. Harrison before his departure to ask what should be done with quantities of fish that were standing in the cars on sidetracks. The company has $600,000 in available cash to carry on its business. It is estimated that $1,000,000 will be needed.
Mr. Harrison made a statement in which he said:
“From the examination of the books of Robert Z. Link & Co. that has been possible since my appointment as receiver I should say that the Link family owns about 60 per cent of the preferred, and about 50 per cent of the common stock. When the $1,000,000 of preferred stock was issued within the year, it would appear that the Link family paid their assessment on this stock and took their full pro rata, and I cannot find that any transfer of any of their shares has been made.”
ASSIGNMENT
New York Times
Henry W. Williams, who carried on a banking and brokerage business at 33 Wall Street, assigned yesterday for the benefit of his creditors, to Mark T. Cox of the firm of Robert Winthrop & Co. Mr. Williams was the publisher of Williams’ Investors’ Manual, and is a director in several other concerns.
No figures were given out yesterday as to the extent of his liabilities, but it was said by a representative of important banking interests that no complications involving other Wall Street houses need be expected as a result of the failure. First estimates put the loss at between $5,000,000 and $10,000,000, but as the part which H. W. Williams & Co. has played recently in the money market has been steadily diminishing, it is believed that the liabilities will amount to from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000. Hawkins & Delafield are the attorneys for some of the principal creditors of the firm.
Lewis L. Delafield of this firm conferred yesterday afternoon with John L. Cadwalader of Strong & Cadwalader, the attorneys for the assignee. They gave out this statement after the conference:
Henry W. Williams, transacting business in the State of New York under the name of H. W. Williams & Co., has made a general assignment for the benefit of creditors to Mark T. Cox of Robert Winthrop & Co. There are no preferences beyond such as the statute gives to employes.
A superficial examination justifies the belief that if the creditors, who are few in number, will co-operate in enabling the assignee to effect a favorable liquidation of the assets, a large sum will be realized for their benefit. Written assurances of important financial assistance to such creditors as will co-operate to that end have been given.
Neither Mr. Cox, the assignee, nor Messrs. Robert Winthrop & Co. are interested as creditors or otherwise in the assigned estate.
None of the lawyers yesterday would make an estimate of the extent of the failure. Some surprise was expressed at the wording of the deed of assignment filed in the County Clerk’s office. It read: “H. W. Williams, trading as H. W. Williams & Co.” as though the assignor had no partners in the firm. The latest corporation directories give the firm’s personnel as H. W. Williams, Frederick A. Farrar, W. N. Phoenix, Franklyn W. Hunt, Charles F. Cushman, and Henry V. Williams. Of these Messrs. Farrar, Hunt, and Cushman live near Boston, where the firm had a branch office.
It was said at the office of Hawkins & Delafield that Henry W. Williams some time ago filed the necessary deed with the County Clerk authorizing him to use the firm name after his partners had resigned their interests. No information could be obtained as to when the dissolution of partnership took place.
It is understood that Mr. Williams’ resources have been dwindling for some time. His firm engaged in several unprofitable consolidations, and in the slump in stocks of March, 1907, it was reported that the concern was hard hit. The October panic found it again in bad shape to meet a financial storm.
Mr. Williams began business in 1865 as H. V. & H. W. Williams, and became widely known as the publisher of Williams’ Investors’ Manual. In 1880 he entered the banking business as a partner in the house of Anthony, Williams & Oliphant. A year later this concern was succeeded by Williams, Oliphant & Co. It was, however, as a member of the house of Williams & Greenough that Mr. Williams attained his greatest prominence in Wall Street. He was particularly active in leather and ice, and is said to have made about $5,000,000 by his operations in these lines.
In 1899 the firm was dissolved, and Mr. Williams continued in business as H. W. Williams & Co. Since then he has been interested in a number of consolidations which have turned out to be heavy drains upon him. Among these was the Colonial Sugar Company, which has since been absorbed by the Cuban American Sugar Company.
Mr. Williams formed the Colonial concern by merging a number of Cuban and Louisiana sugar properties in which he was interested. The venture was unprofitable, and it was said last night by an officer of the company that Mr. Williams’ firm had dropped between $300,000 and $400,000 in it.
Another of his interests was the Newton & Northwestern Railroad of Iowa, which has since been taken over by the Fort Dodge, Des Moines & Southern Railroad. Suit was brought against him recently by Howard Willetts on account of the investment which he had made in the road on the recommendation of Henry Williams & Co. Mr. Willetts is suing for $243,000, the price of 200 of the bonds of the company, on the ground that the line is not earning enough to pay its fixed charges. The case is still pending.
Other concerns in which Mr. Williams has had large interests are the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company and the United States Casualty Company, of which he was a Director, and the Postal Telegraph Cable Company of Texas, of which he is President, now a part of the system of the American Telegraph and Telephone Company.
For some years H. W. Williams & Co. has maintained an office in Boston. It has dealt exclusively in bonds, bidding for local, as well as Massachusetts State, and city issues. The last issue in which the Boston branch figured was that of the United States Envelop Company of Worcester, Mass., which issued $2,000,000 worth a couple of months ago. The firm has also invested heavily in American Telephone Company and Atlanta, Birmingham & Atlantic Railroad bonds. Boston bankers do not consider that the failure will have any important effect on other houses.
Outside of financial circles Mr. Williams occupied an important position in society and was an art lover. His house at Tuxedo Park has been known as one of the finest examples of modern country residences. His town house, 1 Lexington Avenue, facing Gramercy Park and exactly opposite to the residence of the late Stanford White, one of his warm friends, has been renowned for its rich and artistic decorations.
Mr. Williams was a liberal supporter of music, and helped many students to follow their profession. He is, however, best known as a book collector. For years he spent large sums on rare editions and fine bindings. He brought together a library with hardly an equal in America. Among his special treasures were a first edition of Thomas à Kempis’s “Imitatio Christi,” Higden’s “Polychronicon,” and some rare Americana. His collection was estimated as worth between $200,000 and $300,000.
A few months ago it was announced that this library was to be sold at auction. It was the first intimation to the world at large that Mr. Williams was in financial difficulties. The sale began on Nov. 12, and the first day’s offerings brought in $19,000. Some of the leading book collectors of the country, such as J. Pierpont Morgan and Senator Henry C. Lodge, sent representatives, and by the time the first two sections had been disposed of $75,000 was realized. It is understood that the three other sections are still more valuable.
Five years ago Miss Edith Williams was married to Capt. James K. Modison of the Warwick Regiment of the British Army. It was one of the most brilliant social functions of the year, the best man being Sir E. Stewart Richardson, and the ushers Pierre Lorillard, R. Monroe Ferguson, Arthur Derby, Frederick C. Havemeyer, Jr., J. Insile Blair, Jr., J. M. Waterbury, Jr., Henry V. Poor, and Roger Poor. The bridesmaids were the Misses Violet Cruger, Janet Fish, Muriel Robbins, and Helen Cutting.
Note—The way in which the human interest can be brought out in what might ordinarily be considered routine news, is shown by the second of the following two stories.
PATENT AWARD
(1)
New York Times
The Board of Examiners of the Patent Office decided that the man who made the hydroaeroplane possible was not Glenn H. Curtiss, but Albert S. Janin, a poor cabinet maker of Staten Island.
In 1910 Mr. Curtiss began testing a canoe device to carry the planes on the water till the momentum necessary to lift them was obtained, but it did not work.
In the controversy that followed the use of the present device, which consists mainly of outrigging to keep the planes on an even keel, it came out that Mr. Janin had really produced the device in 1909, about a year before Mr. Curtiss had failed to raise his machines at Hammondsport.
Thomas A. Hill, a lawyer, of 233 Broadway, took up Janin’s claims and put them before the examiners of Interference of the Patent Office. Mr. Hill alleged that on July 3, 1910, Curtiss tried four times in vain to raise his plane from Lake Keuka; also that Curtiss admitted the failure. It was shown that drawings of the successful device now in use were made by Janin long before this date, and that he tried to build a machine to test it in operation, but couldn’t get the money.
Mr. Curtiss contended that the device was his, and that it had failed at Lake Keuka because the motors were not strong enough to do their share of the work. In deciding against Mr. Janin the Examiners of Interference said:
While he (Curtiss) was thus engaged Janin was sleeping on his rights, from which slumber he did not awake until after the achievements of Curtiss had been widely published.
Then the case was taken before the Board of Examiners, who found for Mr. Janin. Their opinion reads in part:
It also came out that Janin, in the years he was working on his water flyer, was the butt of many, who looked upon him as unbalanced by one idea.
Concerning the statements of Curtiss that his motors were not powerful enough, the Examiners said:
An excuse of this kind for failure to make flights could probably be advanced in good faith by hundreds of inventors of aeroplanes, who have been seeking patents for the last forty or fifty years.
Mr. Hill said yesterday that Janin’s success probably would make him wealthy; also that an order for 200 hydroaeroplanes is awaiting any manufacturer who can furnish security that they can be delivered. He said the order was from one of the belligerents in Europe, but did not know which.
“The Curtiss factory,” he said, “can turn out about ten planes a week at a cost of about $7,000 each. But no matter who turns them out they will have to pay a royalty to Mr. Janin.”
(2)
New York Evening World
Albert S. Janin, cabinet maker, the other night took off his apron in the shop in which he has worked eight hours a day for the last fourteen years at Rosebank, Staten Island, walked up to the foreman and resigned his job.
He didn’t quit in a huff—a fact that was plainly attested by the manner in which the foreman wrung his hand and his fellow workmen crowded around him, their faces beaming.
“Congratulations, Al,” said the foreman simply. From somewhere in the crowd spoke one of Janin’s intimates:
“The ‘Bug’ has made good. Whaddaya know about that?”
“Well,” rejoined Janin, good-naturedly, “it no longer will be Janin, the cabinet maker, or Janin, the Bug, the dreamer and the impostor. I guess the handle to my name has been pretty firmly established as ‘Janin, inventor of the hydro-aeroplane.’”
And that night the modest little 5-room Janin flat was the scene of a celebration the like of which has never been seen at Rosebank. Most enthusiastic of the guests were men who, for the last ten years, have scoffed at the strange looking winged craft in the Janin back yard, which, the poor carpenter persisted, would some day be recognized by the patent office as the first flying boat.
Rosebank went on the map to stay at 2 o’clock in the afternoon, when word was received from Washington that the board of examiners-in-chief of the patent office had decided unanimously that the man who made the hydro-aeroplane possible was not Glenn H. Curtiss, but Albert S. Janin, the poor cabinet maker of Staten Island. For four years the powerful Curtiss interests had fought the claims of the obscure and almost penniless carpenter, through the patent office and to its highest court—the board of examiners-in-chief.
He would not have won out probably had not Thomas A. Hill, a patent lawyer of New York, taken the case, out of a sense of justice, without compensation. As a former president of the Aeronautical Society of America, and at present a director, Mr. Hill went into the litigation to see fair play.
Just how it feels to a struggling workman, whose $5 a day is barely enough to provide the necessities of life for a wife and seven children, to find himself suddenly famous with a fortune within his grasp, Janin tried to explain.
“We put it over, didn’t we, mother?” Janin beamed, affectionately patting his wife. “If it hadn’t been that she stuck to me—believed in me, when all the rest were poking fun and scoffing—I never would have made it.”
“And if it hadn’t been,” Mrs. Janin interrupted, “that after your hard day’s work for almost every night in the last ten or fifteen years, you burned the oil at your work bench until long after midnight, you never would have made it.”
“The best part of this invention is that, unlike a whole lot of others, it’s going to bring us money—gobs of it,” Janin broke in. “For years we have felt the pinch of poverty, but thanks to Mr. Hill and his work in Washington, I guess that day is past. You know the decision of the patent office gives me a royalty on every hydro-aeroplane turned out in this country dating from the day a few weeks hence on which my patent is printed and issued by the government. Mr. Hill tells me that the royalty can be fixed arbitrarily by the inventor. The failure of any of these companies building hydro-aeroplanes to come to terms, of course, would be followed by an infringement suit, but we don’t expect any such difficulty.
“What will I do with the money? The first thing will be to get a home of our own with plenty of ground around it for the kids to play in. No more of these flats for us. But we are going to stay right here in Rosebank, where my wife and I were born and brought up. You know we were sweethearts, even at old public school No. 13, around the corner. Most of the kids are now going to that same school. The oldest girl, Antoinette, who is now 14, can realize her ambition to go to normal school and take up teaching, if she wants to—but she don’t have to now.”
AN ADOPTED CHILD
Kansas City Star
The Patrick Sullivans had a bad three hours last night.
You see, it was only a month ago that theirs was a childless family. Mary had grown up and was teaching and there were no babies around the house. Then they found a 1-month-old baby boy, abandoned in St. Aloysius’s Church, and adopted him. The cheery household it has been since then!
But yesterday a young woman arrived at the Sullivan home, 961 Walnut Street, and said that she was the baby’s mother, and that the baby’s father had only abandoned him temporarily because they were then in desperate straits, but that everything had come out all right financially and now wouldn’t the Sullivans give her back her boy?
The Sullivans wouldn’t. Not last night.
That’s when their bad three hours began. If their hearts were wrung so at abandoning a baby not their own, what must be the mother’s feelings? That won the day.
Papa Sullivan went to Judge Hinton this morning. He, had been to him last week to adopt the baby legally. Now he wanted to know if that legal process would stand in the way of his returning the baby to its mother. Judge Hinton said it would not prevent such action, and he believed that it would be best to give the child to its mother. But he didn’t look at Papa Sullivan when he said it. Men don’t like to see each other wet-eyed.
“She’ll come back,” said Papa Sullivan, “and she can get him.”
Judge Hinton this afternoon made an order at the request of Mr. Sullivan declaring the adoption of the baby by the Sullivans void. The request was made on the ground that the mother had appeared and had shown herself capable of properly caring for the child. The mother did not appear in court. No further action will be necessary. The mother need only go to the Sullivan home and get her baby.
Note—The provision in the will given in the New York court story making bequests to Chicago nurses, formed the basis of the local story in the Chicago paper; both stories follow.
WILL ADMITTED TO PROBATE
(1)
New York Sun
The will of Walter H. Hammond, the wealthy butterine manufacturer, who was shot dead in the Pennsylvania station in Jersey City ten days ago by Peter Grew, who had a fancied grievance against him, was admitted to probate in Jersey City yesterday. After making a number of specific bequests, including amounts of $500, $250 and $100 to thirty-seven old employees, the residue of the estate goes to the next of kin, share and share alike. Col. Robert A. Hammond is one of the brothers.
Col. Willard C. Ward, who drew the will on October 1 last and filed it yesterday, said that he didn’t care to discuss the value of the estate, as he believed that the bequests indicated about what the value is. He wouldn’t give an opinion as to the value of the butterine business or how much of the estate will be left for the four brothers, two sisters, two nieces and a nephew after the bequests have been settled. The estate is believed to be worth at least $800,000, and probably $1,000,000, as Mr. Hammond is said to have owned much property in addition to his butterine business.
Mr. Hammond leaves his entire holdings in the firm of Hammond & Person, of which he was practically the only stockholder, to three legatees. They are Miss Alice C. Hagan, daughter of a Jersey City policeman, who had been his private secretary for many years and was said to have been engaged to him; Dr. Oscar Bauer, his physician and one of the executors of the estate, and Henry C. Berger, superintendent of his butterine plant.
One of the first bequests provides for the payment of $25,000 to Anna Louise Cooley of New York city as soon as possible. Of this amount $500 is to be paid at once and the balance at the rate of $100 a month. Sarah B. Johnson and Mabel E. Wilkins of Jersey City, employees of the firm of Hammond & Person for many years, receive $1,500 each. Nellie P. Hamilton, a stenographer in the office of Col. Ward, who assisted in drawing the will, gets $250. Gertrude M. Burns, a daughter of Henry Burns of 314 Devine avenue, Jersey City, where Mr. Hammond lived for seventeen years, receives $500. John J. Jones, manager of Mr. Hammond’s butterine company, gets the shares in the American Butter, Cheese and Egg Company that were owned by Mr. Hammond. Concerning one of the bequests the will says:
During several days’ illness in Chicago I was a patient in the Presbyterian Hospital, where I was faithfully nursed by the trained nurses. I desired to recognize the care I received at their hands. I therefore give and bequeath to the following members of the Illinois Training School for Nurses: Nellie G. Burke, $500; Minnie C. Phillips, $500; Jennie Van Horn, $1,500.
This illness occurred about six years ago, when Mr. Hammond had typhoid fever. His physician, Dr. Bauer, was with him at the time, and was also ill.
In making the bequests of from $500 to $100 to thirty-seven employees, who include men and women working both in the office and in the butterine plant, and truck drivers as well, the will says that they are remembered for their faithful services to the corporation of Hammond & Person.
The will allows the executors five years in which to make payment of all the legacies, and the remainder of the property, real, personal and mixed, is bequeathed “to the next of kin and their survivors.” The relatives named are Robert A. Hammond of New York, and Samuel A., Frederick D. and Franklin A. Hammond of Pittsburg, brothers; Josephine Block of Greensburg, Pa., and Anna Emma Dell of Los Angeles, Cal., sisters; Paul Martin, nephew, and Gladys Brown and Madeline Martin, nieces, all of Pittsburg and children of Mr. Hammond’s deceased sister, Sadie Martin.
The total cash bequests amount to $41,710, of which $10,460 goes to the thirty-seven employees named together.
Col. Robert A. Hammond, who was in Jersey City most of the afternoon yesterday, said when he returned to his office at 16 Broadway that he was acquainted with the provisions of the will and had been at Col. Ward’s office during the afternoon. He said he was to see the will at 9 o’clock this morning, and was not aware that it had been admitted to probate.
“No one has any cause for complaint over the will,” said Col. Hammond. “It was just what might have been expected from the fairest, smartest boy that ever walked the face of God’s green earth. No more generous chap ever lived than that boy, and if he had not remembered his employees as he has done it would have been most unlike him. His relatives do not begrudge the money he has left to those he chose to reward.
“There has never been the slightest break in the cordial relationship between Walter and myself or between him and any other member of the family. All this talk that has come up since my brother’s death is pure foolishness. I am the oldest and the head of the family, and the relationship between Walter and me has been almost that of father and son. I gave him his first start in life when he was a boy. I have never asked anything from him or from any one else in my life and I do not ask it now.
“Walter was the pleasantest, sunniest boy you ever knew. He did not sit at the right hand of Mr. Parkhurst, but nothing ever came up to smirch his record during his lifetime, and nothing will come up now that he is dead.
“We are all sorry that our best brother was killed and our thoughts are not on the provisions of his will, but on seeing that the man who shot him down without giving him a chance for his life is made to suffer the full penalty of his act. My entire time from now on will be devoted to that purpose. There isn’t the slightest doubt that I will get my brother’s murderer. I haven’t been wasting any time since Walter’s death.
“I know that the man who murdered my brother has been sleeping well every night and eating three square meals a day. I don’t propose to permit him to escape with an insanity plea. I have been going over the testimony of seventeen witnesses with the prosecutor and helping to get it into shape. My experience in that line makes me of some assistance, and I intend to see the prosecutor every day if necessary, in order that full justice may be done to my brother’s murder.”
(2)
Chicago Evening Post
Three Chicago nurses came into their reward to-day for faithful services and devotion six years ago to Walter H. Hammond, a wealthy butterine manufacturer of Jersey City, who was shot dead on Nov. 17 in that city by Peter Grew, who had a fancied grievance against him.
Under the terms of his will, which was filed yesterday in Jersey City, $500 is bequeathed to Miss Nellie G. Burke, 981 Carroll avenue, a like sum to Miss Minnie C. Phillips, 14 Green Tree street, and $1,500 to Miss Jennie Van Horn of Chicago, who is now with a patient in Japan.
While in the city on a business trip six years ago, Mr. Hammond was taken ill with typhoid fever at the Annex. His physicians, Dr. J. B. Herrick and Dr. Frank Billings, had difficulty in finding nurses who suited the patient. At length Miss Burke was sent for and placed in charge of the case, and she selected for her assistants Miss Phillips and Miss Van Horn.
“I remember Mr. Hammond very well and the circumstances attending his illness,” said Miss Burke to-day. “He was seriously ill and for a long time it was a question as to his recovery. We made every effort to save him and felt a keen personal delight when we knew we had won. He had always, up to the time of his death, remembered all of us, sending us presents and flowers at the holidays and in many ways showing his deep gratitude.
“We were notified by his secretary immediately after his death, but until to-day we had no idea that he had remembered us in his will. I had charge of his case two months and then had to take another patient. Miss Van Horn was with him five months during his convalescence.”
In the little apartment at 14 Green Tree street there was a sound of laughing and dancing feet. Answering the ring of a visitor Miss Phillips opened the door with such a smiling countenance as to obliterate any memory of downcast skies.
“I have just heard of Mr. Hammond’s great kindness,” she said. “Just think of $500; why it’s a nest egg for a fortune! He has always done so many nice things for us girls ever since we cared for him, but to think of his remembering us in his will! I was with him several months and we grew to be great friends after the crisis of his illness was past.
“He often came to Chicago, and frequently would call us up on arriving and arrange for us all to go to the theater, or to dinner. He was by far the most grateful patient any of us has ever had.”
SUIT TO BREAK WILL
New York Herald
An effort to obtain approximately one-half of the bequest of about $2,000,000, left to Mrs. Carrie Chapman Catt for the promotion of the cause of woman suffrage, by the late Baroness de Bazus, who was Mrs. Frank Leslie, was begun in the Supreme Court yesterday by two step-grandchildren of the Baroness. They ask $400,000 each and allege that $200,000 is due to each of two other step-grandchildren.
The plaintiffs in the two actions, which are brought through James H. Westcott, of No. 40 Wall street, are Mrs. Lonetta Leslie Hollander and Mrs. Florence Leslie Weissbrod. Both are grandchildren of Frank Leslie by his first wife, Mrs. Sarah Ann Welham Leslie. They allege that by an agreement made between the Baroness and Frank Leslie December 1, 1879, she promised, in return for receiving his entire estate, to distribute by her will two-thirds of it among the children of his first wife or their heirs. This agreement, they allege, she entirely disregarded in the document which left the large residuary estate to Mrs. Catt.
William Nelson Cromwell and Louis H. Cramer, executors of the estate of the Baroness, are the defendants in both actions.
Frank Leslie was born in 1821 and in 1854 established the publishing business which at one time issued thirteen periodicals. In 1841 he married Miss Sarah Ann Welham. There were three children by the marriage, Frank Leslie, 2d; Alfred A. Leslie and Scipio L. Leslie. Mrs. Hollander is the only child of Scipio L. Leslie, who was married in June, 1875, and died in February, 1879. Mrs. Weissbrod is the only child of the late Frank Leslie, 2d, who was married January 5, 1874. Alfred A. Leslie, who was married in August, 1868, and died in August, 1905, had two children, Frank Leslie, 3d, and Arthur Leslie.
Following the death of his first wife, Frank Leslie married the Baroness May 1, 1875. She was then Mrs. Miriam Florence Peacock Squires. Her first husband was David Peacock, her second Ephraim G. Squires. There were no children by any of her marriages. Before her marriage the Baroness had been employed in the publishing business of Frank Leslie. She was born in 1828 and entered his employ in 1860. Her maiden name was Miriam Florence Follin.
Frank Leslie became financially involved about September 8, 1877, according to the two complaints now on file. It is alleged that he assigned the greater part of his property March 20, 1879, to Isaac W. England for the benefit of his creditors under an agreement whereby he was to receive the property back again in three years if the business had succeeded in clearing all indebtedness. It is said that the business did not clear the debts but that Mr. Leslie died before the property could be returned.
Mr. Leslie also agreed with his wife, it is said, to leave his entire estate to her on the condition that she would use the income and dispose of the principal in her will as follows:—One-third in any way she desired; one-third of the remaining two-thirds to each of the three children of Frank Leslie by his first wife or to their issue.
The complaints allege that the Baroness received everything which she possessed from Frank Leslie, who died leaving about $1,000,000. This was increased by her to at least $1,800,000, it is said. The plaintiffs do not ask that the agreement, which is not produced in connection with the complaint, be fulfilled. They seek instead $400,000 each as damages and allege that $200,000 is due also to Frank Leslie, 3d and Arthur Leslie.
WILL
Springfield Republican
The bequest of a bit of the wool of Mary’s lamb to the Somerville historical society in the will of Mrs P. H. Derby, which was entered in the probate court in this city yesterday, brings to light the interesting information that the nursery jingle, “Mary had a little lamb, its fleece was white as snow,” had a basis in fact. The piece of wool in question was given to Mrs Derby in 1880 by Mrs Mary E. Tyler, the original of the little lamb jingle. It is a piece of yarn tied in a bow and fastened on a piece of paper with pale blue ribbon. Under it is written the words, “wool from Mary’s lamb.” It seems that when the Old South church of Boston became involved financially one of the ways hit upon to raise money was suggested by Mrs Tyler. She took a pair of old wool stockings that her mother had knit for her from the wool of her pet lamb, and that she had never worn, but kept in memory of the departed lamb. These were cut up into lengths and made into bows, like the one that was in the possession of Mrs Derby, and sold for 25 cents each. The result was that $200 was realized, and thus the little lamb helped to save the Old South church.
The story of Mary and her lamb is authenticated and the incidents bear a close relation to the events of the poem, or rather, jingle. Mary E. Sawyer was born in Sterling, March 22, 1806, and the house in which she was born is still standing. She had two sisters and four brothers, none of whom ever had themselves immortalized in rhyme as Mary did. Mary’s father was a farmer and kept sheep. One cold morning in March, 1814, just about 100 years ago and one year over, twin lambs were born in the Sawyer sheepfold one of which was to be known in nursery rhyme for time immemorial. Like all geniuses, she—for it was a girl—displayed the vagaries of it before she was many hours old. So much so in fact that her mother would have nothing of her. Little Mary, age eight, took pity on the young thing and asked her father if she might have it, not thinking of the greatness that would come of this charitable deed. She fed and tended it, and the two became very fond of one another.
It was but natural that the lamb should in time come to have a thirst for knowledge, and, as the first stanza of the jingle has it, “It followed her to school one day,” “Which,” we are told, “was against the rule,” and, as might be expected, “it made the children laugh and play, to see a lamb at school.” It seems that the teacher laughed too, and everything was lovely for a time. But discipline had to be maintained, and:—
So then the teacher turned it out,But still it lingered near,And waited patiently aboutTill Mary did appear.All of which is strictly true to fact. It appears that when Mary arrived at the school the teacher had not come yet and so the mischievous Mary hid the pet in her desk, which was a box-like affair. When school began and the children were called out for their classes, the lamb trotted out to have a hand in the proceedings. And this, alas, caused it to be put without the pale.
Now it happened, so strange are the immutable workings of fate, that a young man of 17, a freshman at Harvard, by the name of John Roulstone, Jr., was visiting the teacher at the school that day. The incident inspired him, and a short time after he wrote and sent to Mary the jingle that is so well known. The ideal way to have the thing work out would have been the marriage of Mary and the budding genius. But no, he died a few years later, never having seen Mary again, so far as there is any record.
The strain of being a celebrity was too much for the lamb and after bearing up bravely under it for two years it gave up the struggle, got in the way of a bull on Thanksgiving day, 1816, and was gored. It died an hour later, with its head on Mary’s lap.
In 1835 Mary was married to Columbus Tyler, superintendent of the McClean hospital for the insane at Somerville. She became a matron at the institution, a position she held for 35 years, and several years after her husband died. She died in Somerville, December 12, 1889, and was buried in the Mt Auburn cemetery, near Boston, the same cemetery in which the poet, Longfellow, is buried. The glowing example of what happened to Mary ought to inspire little children to be kind to dumb beasts that they too may some time taste the fruits of immortality.
Besides the lamb’s wool bequest, Mrs Derby left the following legacies to various charitable institutions: Springfield branch of the woman’s board of missions, $300; Norton memorial fund of the same organization, $200; Congregational women’s home mission society of Massachusetts, $300; trustees of the national council of the Congregational churches of the United States, $3000, to be applied to ministerial relief; Massachusetts society for the prevention of cruelty to animals, $200. Certain books from Mrs Derby’s library are bequeathed to the Springfield city library association and the remainder of the estate is to be divided equally between her two nephews, Dr Edward C. Booth of Somerville and Harry D. Booth of Albany, Ill. Charles A. Gleason is named as executor without bond.
Note—How the same piece of news may be treated in different ways is illustrated in the following two stories.
VALUE OF AN ESTATE
(1)
Chicago Tribune
Doubtless Michael Kennedy’s schooling never progressed to the point where he reaped the manifold intellectual bounties of McGuffy’s second reader. That venerable text book explains school ma’ams. Their purpose is to teach the young idea to shoot, it says.
Consequently there were those who believed Michael misguided when he opened up his shooting gallery in a basement on North Clark street near West Erie street. There Mike—for the consideration of 5 cents for five shots—taught the young idea marksmanship after a fashion of his own.
“Mike, the ne’er-do-well,” they called him for years. But a smile was Mike’s only answer. He went right on loading rifles for whoever came and painting out the bullet marks on the white targets in the gallery.
On May 23, 1913, Mike died. Public Administrator James F. Bishop took charge of the estate, hoping he would get enough out of it to bury the target tender. Mr. Bishop was surprised when he found that Mike, the “ne’er-do-well,” had a snug bank account—some $400.
Another surprise came yesterday when Administrator Bishop announced the result of his seventeen months’ investigation into Mike’s affairs. It was learned that the “ne’er-do-well” left a nephew in Blackburne, Lancashire, England, named as his sole heir. In a safety deposit vault Mike had $42,000 worth of bonds—the products of teaching the young idea to shoot.
(2)
Chicago Herald
“Mike” was a shiftless guy. Any of the bunch would tell you that. Of course he always had money. But then, too, he was always giving it away. He’d lend you anything he had if he knew you, and many’s the “bo” who got the price of a bed from him.
Mike at one time was known as Michael Kennedy, but that was not during the time he kept the shooting gallery in North Clark street. He was a rough fellow, and not very affable with strangers. But he’d go a long way for a pal.
He had his place of business in a basement room. He slept there, and entertained his friends there when not busy loading rifles for his patrons. And everybody said that he could have a good home if he were not so shiftless.
Well, “Mike” died a year ago last May, and it was found he had $400 in the bank. The county buried him and charged $106.75 to his estate. The fellows he had befriended went to the funeral and said “We told you so.” But they agreed that Mike was a good fellow.
Public Administrator James F. Bishop was appointed to take care of the shooting gallery owner’s estate. He started an investigation.
He discovered that Kennedy had a nephew in Blackburne, Lancashire, England, and that the shiftless, open-hearted, free-handed “ne’er-do-well” had just a little over $42,000 worth of gilt-edged stocks and bonds in a safety deposit vault in the Masonic Temple.
The amount was turned over to the nephew, James Kennedy, yesterday.