Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1857-08-26

4
| in Western produce 1t was considered one Of
the safest institutions in the country, but has
lately lost large sums by the failure of Western
railroads, among others $4,000 by the Fond du
| Lac. 1t is stated that checks to the amount Of
| 500, 600 were refused payment Monday. As
many of the holders of these checks were proba.
bly, in need of the money for their everyday bust.
ness operations, the distress in consequence must
have been very great. The Journal of Commerce
in speaking of this failure, says -
"The Ohio Life Insurance and Trust Company,
known throughout the Union, but whose prnci-
pal business Office was in this CITY, where it had
aTesident cashier has been in trouble for several
days, and this morning its checks we're sent back
from the American Exchange Bank, and it may
be said 70 have failed. Its capital, we believe, IL
81 600 0OO0; its liabilities are stated at 81 000
OOO and it is supposed that portion of the secu-
rites 1t holds, have far deprecated, that the
capital will be swallowed up in liquidation. The
cashier is very much blamed for his management,
but we forbear comment until both sides are
heard. The company is largely indebted to the
New York banks. but most, if not all, hold rea-
BILE securities for the full amount"
--
The BURDELL EsTATE.-The decision of Mr..
Surrogate Bradford has been given against the
S4dllu VI AuLSs cunningham " US bhS NluOm VI
DR.. Burdell. 1t is very long, and thoroughly ar
CUES the evidence in the case. The following
twenty reasons furnish a summary of the grounds
upon which the decision is based:
1. The marriage was elandestine-and there is
no presumption in favor of a secret marriage,
neither preceded nor followed by cohabitation.
2. The clergyman selected was unknown to the
parties
8. The place appointed was distant from the
defendants residence.
4. The only witness chosen to be present was
one Of the daughters oil the claimant
5. The witness is contradicted by her own state
ments made under oath at different times, and by
other evidence.
Z. The certificate of the marriage affords no
evidence of Identification
s. The certificate is incorrect as to the name of
the decedent, and eyinces ignorance or error as
to the place of his nativity
g. There were suspicious circumstances attend
ing the transaction.
10. The marriage was not confded by the claim
ant to any member of her family, save one
II. There is no public or private act of acknow-
ledgment, no cohabitation, but the alleged par.
ties lived as single parties.
H. On the part of the claimant there were con-
hdential relations with another person in respect
to whom the decedent charged improper init.
macy
49, The terms of the settlement of the suits
alleged 10 nave leo TO the marriage, are IN writ.
ing. and exclude the assertion of other terms.
a. The marriage took place after the settle
ment had been concluded and carried out.
10. The claimant executed written ms truments
to the decedent in her own name, after the mar
riage. She assigned judgment, he drew a check
to the order. She endorsed it. and he swore to
the affidavit. in all which she was described by
her own name.
l6. At the settlement she stipulated for new
lease of the house
IL. Shortly after the decedent's death she re.
leased all causes of action, and abandoned her
agreement for lease.
Is. He spoke of her with contumely and re-
proach. and made repeated declarations against
marriage.
IS. He was determined TO compel her to leave
the premises, and new lease to another party
was about to be executed
20. The marriage was first announced after his
death.