The national Republican., 1867-08-14
THE COIIRTH.


The contested application to probatei 10 will
Of the late Samuel Devaughn, was takemp and
the following testimony received
II. Russell Barr. Witness Is one Of 70 wit.
masses to the will Of Samuel Devaugh. The
signature Is that Of witness; he signed at the
request Of DR.. Devaughn, and In the essence
Of the other witnesses. Deynughn was sound
mind, capable Of making valid deebr con.
tract at the time. The will was executi In the
store Of Mr.. Richard Ryon; II was sevei years
ago. Never has soon the will since. 10 will
was not read to witness. DR.. Devsugl took
tho will away with HIM does not recolct the
general appearance Of the paper upon sich the
will is written, nor whether II was In 4 eny,l.
ope. Egan Perrie occupy some Of thofoperty
Of the testatori knows Of no purcha Of real
estate after the will was made; knows ,at DR.,
d. was making money remembers lat De.
vaughn had spoken TO him Of the vi some
time afterwards; and said that he hadound
word omitted in his will; Is not oertairthat he
told him ho supplied tho word, but TIT Is the
impression left on his mind.
Charles F. Perrio re.examined. Is acuainted
with time when DeyAugn built O story
store adjoining Mr.. Ryon's store. loes not
know Of any Improvement on real estte made
by Mr.. Devaughn since 1851. On Moday pre.
vious 10 his death Devaughn told witnu he had
made o will. Witness went then toay rent.
II was on that occasion he told witness wished
to change his will, and leave q porti, for the
establishment Of . widows home. Hhad fre.
quently stated this before. Witness uer had
any conversation with any deyisee In nation to
tho will before the death Of tho testtt. Wit.
ness examined tho contents Of the ~ because
the keys were delivered 10 him and heyished to
ascertain the amount Of his responsibility. Tho
testator never told witness that he whsd him
to take charge Of tho safe, but told In he had
given his niece instructions on the subct.
Mr.. Thompson said that II there waAny ques
tion 10 be made as to interllneation o the will
they would have Mr. J. L. Smith her who had
written the will, In court next saturtg.
Judge Hughes thought the testiupg now be-.
fore the court showed a change. AIS request,
Mr. Barr was recalled Witness hal nderstood
Mr.. Devaughn to say that there w q small
error In the will, which he had corped.
DR.. A. Mod. Davis. Witness Is tecutor Of
the deceased. Was intimate with i'm. Do.
vaughn had often spoken to him founding
some charitable institution, which generally
took the shape Of q widows home / his last
conversation about twenty days efore his
death) he spoke Of leaving the beqpt to the
Free Masons, for tho purpose Of estiishing q
widows and orphans homo. wness had
warned tho testntor that great clnges were
taking place in public affairs, and th, bis char.
ity might 60 in a way he did not dire The
testator had a dislike to negroes, al It was in
reference 10 this that the conyersatio occurred.
Testator had also prejudice againItshe Catho-
lies, and that was alluded TO In the joyersation.
Testator had two brothers and side, John and
william, and Mrs. BrayGeld. Hb no knowl-
edge Of any sale Of real estate mdeby the tes.
tator. Knows nothing about dissemination
Of personal estate within late yeat
NJ ~ l.
brought into court.
and he wished to know tho reasopf il.
Judge did not desire that this ersonal estate
which might be the property oflhe caveators
should remain In custody Of one | the devisees.
Mr.. Thompson had no objectioto the appoint.
ment Of receiver. Mr.. Perrie, nd not the de-.
visees, was tho custodian Of the lnd,, DO.
All parties designated DR.. Dds as proper
receiver, and the court said thatr Davis would
receive the appointment upon sins bond in
the sum Of $40, 900. 1t appeare that there was
urgent necessity for the appointment as some Of
the 1880 bonds Of tho deceasedrequired to be
converted before the 18th instan otherwise the
Government claimed the right 1ay them at
their face value.
No further witnesses being pesot, the case
was adjourned until Saturday ns,t.
Dr.. Alex. Med. Davis was qullidd as collec
tor Of the goods, chattels and prsonl estate o
the late Samuel Devaughn; bsnl, $40, 900
| sureties, John II. johnson snd William Martin
Benz. Crier was qualified q, guardian Of tn,
orphans Of Chas. Wood bond, $500 j. p. Coat
and o. s. Baker, suretie,,
The will Of Jas. F. ENseI, o Georgetown
made the 25th of July, 1861, vas proved By
Buckley, and probated. Tho tsLtor bequeath
all his property to Mary EsseI, ht wife.
r. II. Laskey, for Pauline SitE, asked tht
court to take note Of certain excptions fled by
Miss Seitz, 4 ward Of the court, the account
Of her guardian.
The court then adjourned untinOOn on satur
day next.
CRIMINAL CouRT-JUSE TERM-Chie
Justice CartteT.-The court opend at 10 O'Clock
this morning, and transacted thdollowing busi
-ness:
United States vs.. G. W. Campell and Charlie!
g. Godfrey. Keeping q gamblig house. Mo.
tioA TO quash tho Indictment nhe ground that
tho jury were Improperly selecta. The judge
said tho question was most imprtant one, and
Its decision would affect oil the idictments now
pending.
Judge Ferry, for the motion said that the
parties in this case were not thdkeepers Of the
house. The real parties were log ago punished
by Justice; he had brought thi fact to the no
tice Of the District Attorney, bd he had taken
no notice Of It, He had thon No courses left
open: to plea In abatement, oImove to quash
the Indictment. lie had ohosn the latter
course. II was a confessed factthat the grand
jury finding an indictment was ny a legal grand
jury. The judge observed that 4 his inyestiga.
tion Of the subject ho had found that In no case
since the organization Of the cout had the jury
lists been prepared according to aw. The Off.
cials upon whom deyolved the duF Of preparing
the lists had each made the lists Washington,
Georgetown, and county separately, instead ot
making the three lists In joint heeting. The
only question was whether BY failure to act at
the last term the defendants had waived their
right to except to tho grand jury
Judge Terry quoted synopsispf the United
States decisions, made in Archb4ds Criminal
Practice, as showing that plea idabatement or
motion to quash might be made authe term sub.
sequent to which tho indictment ws found.
Mr.. Darlington opposed the milton 1t was
true he had moved on similar grO, ,nds to quash
In tho Surratt case.
The Chief Justice. Have you sen any reason
to change your opinion
Mr.. Darlington. No, sir
The Chief Justice. Then you MED not argue
the question.
Mr.. Darlington said there was apother ques.
tion in the case. The defence wa, technical
one, and was too late The right Il make 1t OK,
pired with the last term. So long as the term
continued its record was In the beast Of the
court and II was not made final till the close Of
the term. In that case, Of course all motions
for change were regular; but at the close of the
term the record passed into the judicial archives,
n md tha ind9a h,d M furthar cOnneotiOn with