New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-04-02
FREDERICK RoLLwAGENS WILL.
CONTINUATION OF THE ARGUMENTS.

CONTINUATION OF THE ARGUMENTS.
The courtroom of the SurrOgates court wA
crowded all day yesterday with an interested AUDIENCE
listening to the summing mp OF counsel before snrro'
gate HutchDgs, in the RoIlwagen VIII case n iargs
number Of ladies present among them the wrno~
OF the deceased. Lena Rolwa0en. Henry L. CLINTON ms
shed his argument for the contestants, and william
Ar1ouX began the summing mp for the proponents Mr.
Clinton presented the following arguments:
The making Of the will and eodicn, and the executions
OF them, aside from the question whether doceheht
possessed tesiaDe caplcity, we're Oi2uS1t ABOUT ~
undue influence. fraud and cFcnmYentiOn and on ths
ground would he the imperative duty Of the Surrogate
To refuse TO admit either IA fnment 90 Ifo9te' Mr. III
ton proceeded 70 show That the nufue iniucncc faud
and cTcumventiOn OF the willow had continued from
The time she entered The enpo. ment 90 me a.
his servant and hJusckoepcf ~ 1892 He cOnnded tDat
the marriage was brought about by fraud; that ne
child born months after the death OF the deceased
was illegitimaIe He comme1tei uDon ne eydefhe W
which IL shown that kpirl last Lena managed
that her brother Henry Hermann. got control OF tho
property OF the deceased AMI acted az the agent IN
respect 10 the whole OF H. collecting the rents and exer
clsing full control over II.
was pregnant aud that the child should share equally
with Rollwagens other children. This was tho only
c GsSiSh FToh hi. sodc she il given outright a
able houses ana lots. by the viii ana codic, II they
are admitted probate, she gets tho bulk OF Rowso
estate Her brother nDpO nted and rustee,
so that She through his instrumentaty can manage
the remainder OF his prop9rY forever, ana do!e ou'
such small portions 20 his children an lnay SEQ NJ
Mr. Clinton maintained that y vas clearly the inty OF
the Surrogate refuse " admit tbe viii or cod'c "
| probate.
William II. ArpQux then began h.s summing up FOR
the proponents. lie frat referred 10 the spectacle
which was presented, that OF whole family attempt
ing TO hold their father up % rdicule There has been
only other parallel case he SAID IN TN. court ana
that the Pike case, IN which the family, WIN ths
exception OF one son. combined 20 accuse ihelr .her
In this case all the sons nave united against iatDe
while the wife and a Few relatives sO0q Dy hiid no
drew counter picture to that given oS me e9+eI io
the contestants showing the sons uyhk 20 topesens
their father man broken down WIN vice. through
drunkenness and hcentiOusness that his second mar
| rage was performed under infamous crcumstances;
| that the third marriage was probably no marriage ~
ALL bat that the deceased had been living with and IN
Producing 10 ms chideh anu thii 10 % mo-,
his wife. while they recognized her a. wI!c; that
they pictured him utterly unable TO control himself
or TO communicate ms tAouSIts IS NO. % a.
imbecile. Mr.. ArnouX denounced these st eihen,s
OF the sons false. Ii known that the deceased
not addicted to SUCH wees Ia that cohn.cIoh, no
said that Hermann the wlies brother bad toid MN,
pre- no. 70 sGa88 s uI" about biz sdn thus shoning
deioacy which counsel was dsappon ted not to ma IN
the sons. lie had been forced 20 the CONCLUSION mat
| this was greedy fight by them for money.
Mr. said that most Of the witnesses for the con-
| they had Rowagen only occasionally for lew
| moments at time. on the other hand tho witnesses
for the prOponents nearly all business friends men
| who called on him in such relation ana were aIwan
Hospitality received OF the witnesses AGAINST the wil
Ducrow had not spoken 10 ROwagen for five years, and
il was evidence that the reason for that WAS iha the
witnesses aunt had desired to marry HOllwasen ana had
preventing TIE answer OF Mr. GeiseDheiD, one OF their
witnesses TO tue question whether nc deemed the
deceased rational man. drawing the Inference tha'
they feared the answer would be detrimental 10 ther
| cause He pointed out that tred, one OF tho SONS
had even admitted thai had been able To understand
his father. He noticed significant omission on the par
OF the opposing counsel IN not calling lIowagehs re-
moved executor his former confidential agent, VINO az
tended to most OF his business, ana VINO certainly couo
| have testified 10 his competency. He referred %
the impression that the VIII disinherted tue sons IN
favor Of the widow, and showed That Oy IL she receVeu
onIy about IS 900 above her share by right DOVER only
about per cent of estate amounting to Det"eca
s6OOO0O and 100000 He reviewed at length the tesn
mony with regard TO the execution the viii and codio
Al this pont the Court adjourned until 1890 IN. w
| day, when Mr. Armour will conclude his argument
MICHAEL HARROLDs MURDERERs ON TRIAL
A full list of jurors was obtained in the
Court OF Oyer and Termner yesterday To try Piotro
steani and SARGENT Paoi for the murder of Michael
Harold, and their names Robt ]. Glendenning
John Edwards, Robt. r. Sherwood, WIN. A. Queupel
| wm s. Fish, August Opperman, Geo T.. Montague.
Geo L. Roberts. Peter 8. Kemp, VIM A. Frazer, Geo. T.
| Harlow, and James r. Lord. stefan and Paoli are
apparently aOOrers and 1t is said that some OF their
| countrymen supply the money to pay their lawyers.
| Messrs Brooke, Fellows, and Dennison.
| Mrs Christian Harold examined, and testified
that the prisoners visited her husbands sJooD No.
s96 BrooIne-st on the Friday night preceding Now %
and there duarreled with man named Colbert, who
boarded there the following sunday night they visited
the saloon again, and Stetani showing symptoms OF
DISPOSITION the quarrel with Colbert Mrs. Hsr
rold called there should be quarreag there.
and her husband ordered them to leave tue saloon they
refused go. and Harold went to the door for an
officer but not finding one came back, and seized hold
of stefn to put him out; Pao, who had been sitting.
| threw nm down, and while he down STEFAN
stabbed him in five places two men then away.
pursued short distance by Harold who soon fell
to the ground and xplred from loss Of blood.
Peter Colbert, the lodger who the other witness
to the homicide corrobOrated the testimony OF Mrs.
Harold, but represented that the first blow given
to tho prisoner S.efan, by the deceased. The Court
then took After Mr.. Brooke addressed
the jury on behalf OF the prisoners
SARGENT PaOli then swOrn and stated through
interpreter that he had met Sefani In Paris he had
this country only three weeks at the time or the
killing StefaD and five Others accompanied him out
that evening to Mr. Boilers salooD where they drank
some wine; after this they went Michael Harr0lds
| saloon and Stefan who was little drunk hal soma
words with Colbert aud with Harold; 5eEIni said.
am not right, will come to saloon again."
| then Harold struck him four or five blows witness
pushed Harold back and said "why do you fight for
| nothingf" Harold threw him down and foIl On HIM
| then steffani struck Harold several times
reply to Mr. Phelps, the witness said that be saw
penknfe in seanis hand during the scufe he noticed
it lust after Colbert pulled Stefin away from Harold
Testimony offered showing that Harold was a dan
gerous and violent man. accustomed 10 weapons
but 1t was excluded. Mrs. Antonio Deri the prisoners
landady testified that Stetfni attacked day
and beaten in their house. and II after that that ho
he bought u knife for seprotectlon. The Court then
| adjourned.
| EXAMINING WITNESSES BEFORE TRIAL.
Judge Larremore denied, in the Court of
Common Pleas yesterday an application on behalf or