The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-05-08

SUPREME COURT-GENERAL TERM Before Chief
Justice Barnard lngTaham and Sutherland 49,
Harriet r. Chrsty and Edwin B. e hnsty, appellant,
against Poris q. Clark, Peter GilseY, and John j.
Nathan. Proponents OF a paper writing purporhng
10 De the last will ana testament of Ell WIN F. Chr
deceased.
This is the celebrated will case arising from n
paper-writing called the will OF Edwin +. ChrIsty,
tamlIiarly known as the originator of negro min
slrelsy, who committed suicide ON the 9th day of
May, lo62; by the paper IN question: his wife and
CHILDREN were excluded from all benefit of his pro-
perty Pans q. Clark Grew the alleged will and
claims to be executor the reunder
The opinion was delivered by Chief Justice Bar.
nard.
!. " whether harriet Il. ChrstY was the lawful
wife, and Edwin Is. ana " illIam A. Chrlsty the
legitimate children ana heirs at law of Edwin f.
ChrlstY, deceased, or not.
2 Whether paper purporung to be the will of
Edwin l.. Cunsty executed while he was of
Whether said paper was procured to be exc.
cuted by SAID Edwin T. ChrlstY by fraud or undue
influence not.
From the return OF the Surro gate it does not ap.
pear q at he considered or pa Sc on the ftst ques
ton. HaVlng found the propounded as Will to have
been duly executed, it became necessary for him to
pass on the first question. The recital in the Surro
gates decree therefore umes and asserts that Har
riet L. the lawful wife Edwin Z. Chris, " and
is now his widow, and that William A. and Edwin
B. are his legitimate children and hers-at-iaw.
Although this recital Is not q uecs. point,
yet shows that the Surrogate, having concluded to
admit the paper to probate, assumed, for the pur-
poses OF the IL igatIon before him, that Harriet E.
the lawful wife of Edwin r. Chrsty, aud is his
WIDOW and that Wllnam A. and Edwin b are his
legitimate CHI dren and helrs-at.aw. This Court
cannot therefore consider the first question with a
view OF reversing the Surrogae's Decree as he has
not passed Nor tins COurC, for the purpose
Of sustaining the decision below, examine The evi.
dence to determine whether Harriet Il was the wlte
legitimate children and helrs-aJ law of Edwin p.
ChrIsty, for that would make this Court on appeal a
couIt OF original jurisdiction pro tdO, and to
mine here. for the fret time, printed testimony,
question OF fact which the parties have a right
have determined, in the first instance, by tribunal
that sees the witnesses nd hears the oral proof
This first question is, however, of considerable
Importance, as bearing upon the other two, and ard
ing IN their decision In this yew the Court may
examine 1t 1or the purpose of seeing what pIoba-
bhty there is oil tine appellants sustaining tine
a1nImatiye or the proposition ON re.tral. For if
such probability be great, then, for the purpose of
considering the second and third propositions the
affirmative Of the first proposition must, on this
appeal, be deemed found fac especially In
view of the aforementioned action OF the Surro.
gate in this proposition
1t is well settled that marriage may be proved by
evidence OF acts of recognition, matrimonial CO.
habita ion, genera reputation, and declarations of
tue parties: Rose vs.. C,ark, Paige, 9. r., 574;
0ei BARK %&ifF 3if lsS y 38S. 8SSi"y'0n vs. war
that the proven facts, that they went from home
aVowedly to get married, returned were received
into society," and lived together husband and wife
Tor several years unill the man died, were aoun.
oant 10 prove the existence OF a marriage Under
tnese pllhcples the evidence IN favor OF the mar
riage between Harriet and E. F. Christy is certainly
very strong
The le tiers written by him to her are very strong
The first one read in evidence is dated August 10,
1S45, and is addressed TO Mrs. E p. Christy There
Is nothing peculiar in this letter. In his letter of
October 20, he saYs:-"I presume you are lonesome,
Harriet: hut you foo ish o suppose that wIli
get weaned from nv family "
In this letter OF January 16 1S49 he says :-"Do
not be foolish, Hal, and worry yourself with your
folly OF ima9Inngs"
In his letter Of January o. l848, he says:-"Has
MR. Miller puC that plate with my name on 1T in
pew in the church YETI il not, speak to him about it,
regret TO say that | do not ace that confidence
such ties we are" Apaln ''My absence in my
business from my family is no incentive to produce
want OF affection; on the contrary, that very fact
should endear them more to me lis natural re-
sui and nature is my God
In his letter OF March 8, 1848 he savs:-"I some
Times think VIII purchase mouse and lot there Tor
In his letter of March 16, 18i8;-"As regards my
coming to Buffalo, am not partlcu arlY anxious
see that city unless it is on account my family"
Agan;-"Go to church, serve God, and take good
In his letter OF March 26 Is4S, he says:-'T am
pleased to hear of Mr. Inger 'ols attention, also
invitation to the sewing society" In his letter of
April s, l84S, he ys:"I am glad to have you make
the acquaintance of respectable persons, and l do
not object to your visiting such; i you were young
and beautiful, Harriet, a lump of gold as you
say, would not be more anxious to see you than
am but my business would go to the devil If should
In this letter of May g. 1S4S speaking of the illness
OF his son, B ron, he saYs:-"GOd knows, l hope
that his situation is not bad you think 1t is ;
were he to be taken away from us now, it would be
loss we could never replace, and source OF uncon
trolable grief. You must not worry yourself too
much, Harriet; remember let what happen, you will
Lave tho consolation OF knowing that you have
hlWhys uOhe your uuty Dy your chlluTeh, ana tnat
no eaTthiy want or care was required that was not
in attendance" In this letter OF May, 8, 1S49, he
saye:-'l am pleased TO learn hat Mr.. NeWhall has
paid that note you need not be afraid OF my lending
hln any more. l have solemn pledged myself to
lend no person any money OF amount above ten
dollars, without the best k nd OF security"
Besides these extracts, the who tenor OF the let
teIs is such as to lead to the conviction of the exist
ence OF marriage relations. They do not con ain
those strong expressions OF love and affection which
4 young man would address to hs betrOthed, nor
a VIII ch would address TO a mistress of whom
= he was passonatelY enamored; Tut they show that
deep feeling of mutual inte est IN the aaiIs Of each
other Which is never found outside of the re-
eognized domestic relations. What does he mean
by the expression, United by such ties as we
areY" Does he mean the tie of kept mistressl Does
he desire hls kept mistress to NIX respectable
society ana take pew in church, with plate on 1t,
bearing hls manner Does he eXhort his mistress TO
go to church and fear GodH WHAT does he mean
when he refers TO his family thinks of buying a
home Tor them is it bastard children and lewd
his lending money but wiieS To whom but wire
would he in order to quiet such anxiety write that
he had pledged bImself not TO lOanG
1t is scarcely possible to draw from these letters
any conclusion other than that OF the existence OF
marriage relations.
But there is, in addition to this, considerable
proof that they were known among their friends
and ecquaintances as husband and wife His
mother and one of his brothers knew of and recog
nzed the relation, His mother, in her letter of Sep
tem6er ~ lSis to Harriet winds u3 "Adieu YOU
One OF his brothers, in his letter of April 49, 1S49
Addre' ses Harriet Jhus:-"Slster Harriet" Fur
'ther, the witness Walker and tine witness Campbell
testify 10 admissions made by f. p Chrsty and fact
connected there with so crcumsantiaIly as 10 eayC
but little question to the honesty and accuracy
their testimony.
merOus other matters running through the test
mOny, such the presentation to Harriet of exc
inscribed "E r. c. to his WIFE" are clearly abun
dant evidence, under the principles of law aboy
n 49,