The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1868-07-17
Jack E.ee-A kentucky Romance.


lucky. The facts developed in this case
are OF most romantic and exciting cha
racter, and read like sensational novel.
The following is brief abstract OF the
principal episodes of this legal drama.
Like many modern novels, the story goes
back half n century, and begins thus:
John or Jack Lee was born n the city OF
New York about the year 1900. John, III
his youth, was very dissipated; engaged IN
horse-racing, cock-fghting, and the IKE,
and in n few years had spent all tha' h,'
father had left him, and some TINE NJ "
tween 1892 and 1924 disappeared from -'e"
York. 900, :; or
He went to Newport in 1872, III d very
dilapidated condition, but ai'cf awhile
found means to open cohce-house' anu nc
gan to prosper. He was, however an III
veteratc gambler, and liable TO the ups anu
downs OF that set Of improvldent persons:
He was considerable of m epicure, ana
never failed to indulge his appetite Tor
luxurious eating when he could do so with
out much expense TO himself. One OF Lees
strange eccentricitics was an excessive
fondness for cats and canary birds, and his
store ALWAYS abounded with quite number
of them. When he would 60 out OF morn
ing To the beef-gtand, three or four cats
could ALWAYS be seen following him, with
tails erect whining for their expected por-
ton.
Lee died intestate in 1858, and no one
claiming the administration OF his estate,
the Campbell County Court committed us
administration to Charles Stricken, then
acting sheriff, who filed his petition IN
equity against the creditors and unknown
heirs for II settlement of the estate. In 1898
the widow and children of William Lee, OF
New York, Il half-brother of Jacks, nieo
their answer and cross petition, setting up
q claim to the whole estate. The final re-
sult was the confirmation of the right OF
property to the heirs of William Lee.
In July, 1860, FIVE years after the death
Of Jack Lee, Anna Eliza Selman (late Lee
and James Lee instituted suits OF ejectment
in the Circuit Court, claiming the estate OF
Jack Lee, deceased, as his children and
only heirs. The circumstances on which
their claims are founded, and which de-
vclop the most romantic part OF the case,
were as follows:
Some time about the year 1922 or 1923
Young man named John Lee made his APP
pearance near lIagcrstown, Maryland. He
was travelling with an lrishman named
RYAN, who was a tailor, and seems to have
been accompanying the men engaged Ill
constructing the National road from Baltl-
more to Wheeling.
In the fall of 1923 Ryan and Lee arrived
ut Hancock, in Maryland, and worked there
as iourneymcn tailors in the shop of one
Mcclellan. Lee in the mean time became
acquainted with Il young woman IN the
neighborhood named Catherine Garaghty,
the daughter Of n respectable old man who
had accumulated some property, and who
kept toll-gatc near Hancock. In April,
1924, Lee married Catherine. Her father
set them up in the little town Of FlinStOnc,
near Cumberland, Md. Lee worked ut his
trade here, but was OF dissipatcd habits,
fond Of horsc-racng and gambling in Il
small way, and inattentive to business.
He and his wife seem not to have lived
happily together, on account of his lrregu-
laritics. They had two children-a son
named James and a daughter named Ann
Eliza. In the fall Of 1927 he abandoned
his family, the daughter being n few months
old. Several witnesses testify that he lett
Cumberland in December, 1927, and went
to East Tennessee, for n mail contractor
named Reside, TO assist in taking horses
to louisville, Tennessee. This was the last
known Of him in Maryland.
His wife, finding that she was abandoned,
returned with her two children to live with
her father and brothers at Hancock. Here
she remained some ten or twelve years,
when, supposng that Lee was dead, she
again married man named Farrell.
About the year 1915 Farrell and his wife,
Al. Il; 10
natl, and some years aiterward Ann Eliza
Lee, having grown to womanhood, married
Garrett Sclman. Selman took his young
wife and went to Newport to live. Here
she heard Of Il man named John Lee, who
was at the time keeping grocery, and the
name being the same us that Of her lost
father, she began 10 inquire into his his
tory and antecedents. Finding that in age
and personal appearance he agreed with the
description Of her father, and further,
that he hud come 10 Newport about the
time her father had abandoned her mother
in Maryland, she told her mother she be-
lieved this Newport Lee was her father.
The mother was greatly shocked at this, as
she had married again, and raised another
family Of children and in the Catholic
Church, Of which she was devout member,
SuCn an OllcnCe was Il mortal SIN.
AS to the time when Lee came to New
port there was much contrariety Of testi
mony, some witnesses testifying that he was
there rs early as 1924, and others that he
came in 1928.
The heirs of William Lee, Of New York,
claim that Jack Lee, Of Newport, KY, was
born and brought up in Reade street, New
York was for two or three years student
of law with one Thomas Phenix, on Muir
ray street that he left the Empire City
about the lst of September, 1924, and ar
rived in Newport, Ky, in October Of the
same year.
They brought forward evidence to prove
that their New York and Newport Lee had
existed for many years as u distinct being
from the tailor Lee; that while their Lee
lived in New York, the tailor Lee lived i'll
Maryland that while their Lee lived in
Newport, the tailor still lived in Maryland :;
and that after the tailor Of Maryland was
dead, their Lee still lived, and that their
Lee never was Il tailor, but was 4 lawyer.
Whatever may be the validity or fallacy
upon which the claims of the Newport
claimants are founded, the fact that there
is u remarkable resemblance between
James Lee, one Of the plaintiffs, and the
deceased, Jack Lee, can scarcely be
doubted. Many of the Oldest and best
citizens bear testimony to this fact, and it
was brought forward in evidence with great
force by the testimony of the late K. B.
McCracken, who said he saw James Lee in
the courthouse without knowing he was
party TO the suit, and without knowing
there was such II person. He remarked to