The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1871-04-14
AFTER HER SHARE.

Vhe Estate of the Late JOhn II. COttrell--
Widow Turns UP TO Claim Her share
Ofthe $500, ,OOO-The Result.
An interesting case has been decided bv the
Register of Wills but IL will not end the contro
versy In question. On the Sd of February last,
John +. Cottrell, q commission merchant died
intestate his property, personal and real estate
being valued at about 500, 900. On February 4
letters of administration were granted TO Wash
ington Ritter, Jr., Joseph F. Cottrell, and Will
liam X, Hemphill. On the 21st of last March
the aforementioned facts, and further de-
claring that Mr.. Cottrell, the intestate. was her
husband, and that he died leaving no issue ''aud
her, bis widow, surviving" In 1t she asked that
citation might issue requiring the persons to
whom the letters had been issued to sho W cause
why the same should not be revoked.
This was done, and the case was referred to an
examiner, the counsel being Charles E. Lex and
George w. Thorn for the administrators, and
Henry NJ Phillips and Henry X. Wallace for the
petitioner. 1t appeared in the evidence that the
petitioner did not live with her husband and
that not until his death did che make public the
fact that such marital relation existed between
her and the deceased. One of the administrators
Washington Ritter Jr., declared in his testimony
that he never saw the petitioner before the death
of Mr.. Cottrell and the day after that event he
met her, and she asked him whether the de-
ceased had left will and upon his replying
in the negative ''she grieved," as he said
'awhile, and then declared that Mr.. Cottrell had
promised to make will and leave her $50 a
month during her life;" and from her conversa-
ton the witness learned that Mr.. Cottrell said.
"But, Mary, you can't get at the principal"
Mr.. Ayres the former partner of Mr. Gottrell,
testified that he knew the petitioner and that
one day, mentioning to her that Mr.. Cottrel's
housekeeper did not get on WELL asked her why
she did not take charge of his household affairs;
whereupon she answered that she could not go
there, or would not, but that no person had So
good right there as she. She said, also, that
she had often had the chance of marrying him.
h1f mt lat 4 hats Uoc ia1 20,
Alderman Edward s. Fitch swore that he per-
formed the marriage ceremony in a house on
Swain street. between Green and Spring Gar
den, and had known both of the parties before
their marriage. The certificate was produced,
aBd he declared 1t genuine. Upon these facts,
with some others of minor Importance, the Re-
gister issued this opinion revoking the former
etters:-
1t is alleged that the letters of administration
granted to the respondents were improvidenty
granted by the Register at the request OF the petit
tioner claiming TO be widow OF the ntes, ate. To
determine whether letters were improvidenty
issued, it is enly necessary to consider whether,
with full knowledge OF the relative positions of
the parties such as is now disclosed by the evidence
the same or different disposition would have been
made by the Register originally H. at the time of
tratioD, the petitioner had appeared and proved
the the actual sl,ng Performance of the cere-
by the magistrate who performed it, ana
further supported by the testimony of a person
who though Actually present within sight OF the
parties was vet within hearing, and heard the ma
gstrate repeat the ceremony, as also the responses
of the petitioner and the intestae, the Register Is
very clear that he would not have granted the ad-
mlnistratioD to any person without the consent of
the widow and he would have regarded petition
ers claim widow fully sustained To
sure, an attempt is made to throw doubt upon the
testimony oftbepe ltioner but the Register does not
view as successful one, and would not, II 1t
much stronger, undertake IN D proceeding Of this
kind to determine question OF veracity but would
rather adopt suCh course as would give the parties
opportunity to have the question determined by
a jury, whose especial province is to decide what
amount OF credit Is to be given to the testimony OF
Whilst the Register regards it as his duty to
grant the prayer of the petitioner to revoke these
letters (without indicating what disposition may be
made OF any future application for the admnistra-
ton), that this is an an eminently proper for
the parties to formally agree upon proper person
to be appointed to administer the estate.
And now, to wit, April IA, 1871, it is ordered and
decreed by the Register that the letters of admins
ton by the Register upon the estate OF John F.
Cottrel issued on the 1th day Of February, lSIl TO
Joseph F. Cottrell, Washington Ritter, and William
X. Henphi be and the same are hereby revoked.
WILLIAM M. BUM, Register.
DEATH OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD OF
HEALTH.-At 10 o'clock this morning DR.. Eliab
Ward, President of the Board of Health, died at
his residence. The deceased was about AZ years
of age. He was born near Boston, graduated
with the highest honors from Harvard College,
and came to this city twenty years ago, esta-
blsl ing himself in the lower section of Pha-
delphia, and soon had the largest practice of any
physician in the city. For ten years he had been
a member of the Board of Health, and for the
three past years its President. He was Inspec-
tor of Drugs in the Custom House under William
b. Thomas. and Port Physician under Collector
Pollock. He was delegate to both the Lincoln
and Grant Presidential Conventions from the
First Congressional district lis death was
caused by pneumonia, having been ill ten or
twelve days He leaves wife and one child.
The funeral will take place from his late resi-
dence, at the northeast corner of Third and
Christian streets, on Monday afternoon at 3
o'clock. Tomorrow at 12 o'clock there will be
special meeting of the Board of Health to take
appropriate action on the death of its esteemed