New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-03-13
THE EUROPEAN TOUR.

o. o,,amplote voyage % Europe on that account, ana
:, yas ,artidy arranged that she should CO. accom-
or,ed by the elder Mrs Rowland, and in that case,
Tato and her husband to remain with the decodent
% lila house during the absence Of the others but tho
ian was deferred, when Kate taken quite Ill ia
,h and for her health well for her mothers It
os decided that the two. and Kates husband and his
mother should visit Europe, "a they did sailing on the
~ ~ the time Of their departure Mr.. and Mrs Taylor
and Mrs HOwand ST., only occasionally mterchanged
, nd there IL no evidence OF any intimacy OF attach
,nSnt between them, OF much intercourse between
ohers than Kate and her father and mother; and 10
80 NOT appear that after the party named left
Enrope the nearer acquaintance between Mrs. Taylor
and the elder Mrs Rowland or her son, HpeDcd into
feeling OF aiee9n, OF eyGn OF Walin s s or mn
mony that during tho absence any thing occurred To
nroVe any real change in the affection OF Mrs Taylor and
her daughter for each other; despite the instance OF
Deasantness, fully detailed by Mrs. Rowland s,i,
Than by the daughter and despite the separation
of the party at Cologne for few weeks travelling apart
Mrs Taylor with her maid and the others togeler re-
they left for the return stoner NJ havfe aud came
home they wont; nothing happ nng u mar Their cox
dial relations after they came together ut Para
But aside from the general evidence above given,
tending to show that the deceden IN his mind attached
responsibility TO the elder HOwland Tor assisting
at the marriage Of the daughter under such cireuln-
stances, when, particularly, aa Hno .estlies she sup
posed the decedent did not know that the marriage was
To take place the couple would not have let New
York as they did-it is material 10 consider the following
testimony Of his continued dspeasuro expressed GGr
the date Of the instrument In question, viz
He Mr., Taylor, had given Kate 5000 year, and the
Howiands should not have any OF his money. llr.
He Mr. r., should always take care Of Katy, but the
Howlands should never possess a dolLir Oh As money
lie Mr.. Taylor, had fixed the Howlands 50 that they
would not inherit dollar OF his money. tirs DODnely)
lie. Mr.. T., had given Kate 5000 a-year. On being
asked II that was enough for her he said n much
a. (referTing tO young Ar. Howland) should ever
have Of his money. mir. Spinna1
DE- uackenbos testified that IN te early part OF July
last Mr. Tayor SAID Here j. my trouble; there isa
grief here" batting his heart and that Is killing me-"
that his granddaughter the only thing that was eit him.
had away and married against us consent, and 70
the last person in tie world he would like TO call son N
law He only married tho g1r for bcr mOnoy. The Doc
Also said that the Thursday before his death AIR.
Taylor said s his business arrangements were settled
that his will was made and has ahaiFs al IN COMMON
10 leave Dr. QuaekenDoss further testld tha on mon
day preceding his death, Mr. Toy Ion said he had mace
viii, ana had left the bGlk oil las properly 70 ne NJ
and whO be believed, TIM best Custodian OF ~ thI
he had LEFT Kate SAO0O year (Air. Baker,.
Samuel g.. Courtney testified that in July or Auguet
last lie asked Mr. Taylor Vi9t Kind OF man young bow
land was, when MI T. became quite Indignant bristlea
up, and wen, he Is the man mat stole away haS lou
can maGine what kind az man would do that mat
told by witness that he hoped Kate wOd not he injured
by 1t, lie answered no. that he had provided for nor
TIE RIGHT OF DrsfsHERuANcE.
Now before making any further application Of thecv-
denec the instrument inlueson, it is vel to observe
that there no dispute made OF the mental cipcty Of
the deedent AZ the time OF thoalegd execution, nor IA
il claiIned that if the subscription is hs genuine sigma
ture there ia any tine attestation in the other
forrarties required by The statute and II genuine and
made without any undue influence or irauu upon tne de
ceen ii - wholly nmateria how unjust OF inequtlhle
the instrument Is. as wholc or IN any Of IT, paris
Every person capable Of making wiz has o iegN
yighf Wholly 20 deprive his child, children or other
descendautt OF any share Of bis estate upon his deoase
with tie DOtfre o. dishe7tdRce, Win or Wit.out
cause: and how common 70 Is for husband ~ devise an
70 wife, and wife - her husband aud thai without
being considered any impeae9meht or re1ectoh uioh
cases what may appear d. unjust Ia them especially
IL minors dacspobtc of sifriepty approaching the
value Of property, may and probably is generally, best
I'm many sucb insta-es II Is als prominently inst and
at
est ate the survivor De left 10 dispose of by VIII,
az and the mature characters u chifrcn
should render wise and cxpcdient At all events.
whether Just eXpodient not the law does not
question it and allows the ndfy dna freely judge.
Iuf in this ease the dcoe,lent has not, by the lnstr-
offered gwen hi entire estate to his vile Besides
the legacy OF $1,000 tO his confidential clerk, and
LEGACY al T. and tie Tor life ~ dwelling hote ~
one Adene Weston he secures $500 year 70 bis grand
daughter the ooutes taut for life (which = the interest
of about SIS 90 capaD: and it Is maintained that the
provision for her Decu Is ina tE1 The Instrument
cannot no genuine II genuine shat such undue iniu-
eDce or fraud must have been practoed upon the deco
dent by Mrs TAYLOR, the principal deNlsec ana egatce
Mr. Dnryea another egatec or II not by either Of them,
10y some other person or persons unknown discover
10 evidence, whatever. needing comment, IN regard
10 the allegation OF fraui nv any pcTson IA pro
curing tho execution OF The Instrument although Il
one written allegations; and to undue Influence
the counsel for contestant has offered no testimony lat
consider requires discussion, except such must Ue
supposed by him 20 have been the letters written by MI
TAYLOR 10 the deccdent, while In Europe. Without re-
fering 10 the degree, Of importance might attaeh 10
rlch proofs il oere IL Is sufficient Ia siy t there are
no such letters in evidence before Yet the counsel
for contestant offered very considerable evidence to
show at while last in EurOpe0nd, since her marriage
before she abrUad-tbogc occurrences cKiuat
ing prOyOc5tiOn and dis Oh the part OF her mother
toward her. sufficient q warrant The belief mat She had
eXerted her influence upon the deccdcHt 10 tlat extent
o. finally lead him 20 make the interest IN question:
MRS TAYLOR NOT ACCUSED.
Otherwise, such testimony has macriality what
ever unless offered TO show that yr. Taylor dis
effected toward her daughter possibly 10 lie implicated
in the fabrication Of the instrument; but the counsel of
the contestant, in his Anal argument expressly dis
claimed any such imputatiOn. and he understood
finally ON the trial to abandon every allegation filed I'm
the case except commences. st as 80 much evil
dence was already before the court 10 the occurrences
which lad Iee offered Ia show undue influence 30 the
P PpSn tc eeIaneo tie testimony in that reoe
and 1 SEC nothing IN any 81 the instances
to which the cider Mr. Rowland the dauel-
ter referred IA their testimony, which may
between mother and child il is impossible for any court
10 become fully possessed OF an the circumstances or in
fnelees causing attending such Incidents rs were de
tailed happening in privacy, or to dotefnine their
earnes4ness The evidence no best meager. and
gard the occurrence as showing only moneldary ebu
tons feeling TO which all more ls liable. and
which yet consistent with enduring affection
Indeed, almost every unpleasantness IN Europe or
here referred between mother and daughter. IS
proved to have been soon followed by some kind or
pleasant act or word and even on TINS ta neither Mrs
Taylor the contestant was subjected 10 cI-seAtn
naton by the other; the testimony OF Mrs Iay nor was
very brief and only ~ 10 Two OF ufee hatter ana Tue
contestant exhibited remarkable candor and caution,
and In her statements about disagrpeens, was much
less inmate than her mOtheTin-law
Therefore had not She contestants counsel Withdrawn
his claim OF undue influence, should hOd that There
Vas no proof whatever 10 sustain the allegation.
Next what IL the evidence OF PrOOdbtios upon which
reliance placed by contestants counsel 10 show that
this uaper not contain the real viii and disposition
OF the docedent, and II therefore not gentrinei
First That Is al pdtaeeTo,h las gyedt affection for
has 0randddUJht11.
The will appears 20 me not AT al inconsistent with that
affection albeit II bar against benefit To the How
lands for in giving her 5000 year for life secured
her against privatOn and assured her In" means OF
defense against her husbands possible neglect ca ina
bty uroperly To provide for her, which tire deedent
NAV have feared but at the time left the daughter
To RELY upon the good Judgment affection and generosity
nv will Of her grandmother, she had trusted her
decedent thus leaving much 10 depend
on the futre character and conduct OF the young hus
band who had only just entered upon business life, and
concerning whose career appears MI. Taylor enter