The New York herald., 1875-11-16
THE SINGER WILL CASE.
A Field Day Between the Or
posing Counsel
The Value Of the Confessions
Of a Testator.

Court al White Pains Wcstchester county yesterday.
Before the proceedings commenced Surrogate Cohin
announced that he had received proposition from
counsel for The contestant setting forth that in view
or the large number or witnesses already subpenaed
10 testify in behalf Of his Client he would ike to have
three consecutive days devoted to the hearing in the
case which proposition he he surrogate had agreed
TO- provided would be suitable 10 the counsel the
other side Mr. Carter and ex-Judge Porter at once
concurred in the arrangement, and accordingly the
case win be continued this morning and TO morrow.
Surrogate Colin then stated that in regard tho
question raised the last hearing 10 whether Mrs
Foster the contestant could relate conversations with
the deceased ne inclined to think that such ques-
tion may be asked IN case Or probate, that being a
serious question, he felt in the case under considera-
iion.
Mr. Carter contended that the statute under which
the Surrogate ruled did apply to where the
party contesting claims the widow OF the
She first has show that she what she claims to
be- and that but attempt TO forge link in the
shsin Of proorby which She attack the will The
man is dead aud the the privilege Of
estying matters susceptible OF contradiction by
Ihe defence.
Ex,Judse Porter claimed that similar question had
arisen in the Hardin will before the Surrogate Of
New York, who decided to exclude conversations be-
the alleged wife and the That she may
she prove thy
CONFESSIONS DEAD NAS
who cannot speak for himsells ne held that the
statute says mo claimant against the executor shall
testify IN his or her behalf
Surrogate Colin intimated that perhaps y would ne
nice question to decide whether the contest was
against the executor or the next Of KIN.
1T this stage counsel suspended further remarks, II
beng tacty agreed hy both sides that that stage
had not yet arrived the proceedings when the ques
TON must come IN for 1ual 6y the Court Mr.
Tup Dait a
direct examination Of Mrs Foster he would place an
other The stand ~ order 70 establish certain
brought bv the contestant at the last hearing
William j. A. Fuller testified that he IS an attorney
counsellorat-law in the city Of New York i ac-
qgaiuted with Mrs Foster; was engaged oy her ~
suii for divorce against NJ. Singer In 1867 that
be instituted proceedings IN the he produced his
Office register containing record q the proceedings
Pr. Carter objected and the entries ~ lhe register
were cxcuGed, for while the entry Of summons and
complaint may be shown thereirom the fact 81 their
issuance and service could not be proved by lhe record
produced.
Mary Ann Singer for divorce against ! ~ SINGER
there was complaint NOW produced, accompanied w
affidavit of service.
The admission OF the documents merely showing that
n sult had been commenced, not opposed Accord
ingy number Of legal papers connected with the d.
suit handed in, numbered and placed tile
b. the court stcnographer.
Witness coutinued-Thcre appearance IN the
case an answer was also put H. but believe il Was
LETT with the Judge motion for alisnony, this mo
tOD made on atidavits; i was opposed and At
terward decided: have not the decision a.
made; according my best recollection there was
Endorsement on the papers granting atlmony, but 10
order was madei have paper showing why ~ order
was made; have papers now with me emhodying
''sTIPULAroNs BETWEEN COUNSEL
legal controversy here to the admisshllity
OF papers and when both sides had presented their
views in the promises, Mr. Van Pelt said lac would next
pas paers IN regard 'u to aimony before SUI
mittng those relating 10 stpulations be-
tween couhseL Inc ihaorseheht Wa theh rcau,
ordering s. 900 per annum aiinony pendente lite, and
$3.50 counsel fees The proceedings il appeared, we're
had in the Supreme Court before Justice Barnard, m
Nay, 1861. Among the other documents offered and
admitted part Of the case, was copy q an agree
ment between the contestant and the deceased THIS
embraced the securing 70 Mrs singer lnoW roster
furnished house in Twenty eighth street, and $50
per week, instead OF the alinony named above. The
house be given the contestant IN fee simple,
aud the weekly allowance 10 continue during her
lifetime, so long the conditions named ~ Inc agree
ment were adhered to. This agreement did
not deprive the contestant Of the right
to prosecute divorce a successful Issue, and
at the same time left her tree and untrammcIed to
any matrimonial contract she might be party TO IN
witness resumed-Not long af,ervard Mrs singer
married Mr.. Foster, and then no further action was
taken ID the suit TOR divorce the FIRST information OF
her marriage with Mr. Foster had from Mrs Singer
herself; cannot say that | first heard Of II
within SIX weeks after me signing oi the
agreement (here receipt for $500 signed by Abbott
Fuller, and in favor of Mrs Foster tor legal services
On tie part Of the rm named, was produced ana ad-
mtcd Is cvdence); there no definite arrangement
made reference to the further prosecution of the
divorce; had conversation in regard to how
Should continue the SUIT; stated % her That had my
doubt 81 the successful issue ~ the reference that
thcfe nad been handsome provision made Tor her she
ought lie content, but she still wished 70 retain
the ease there legal steps taken IN the sui:
aGer April 1852
Here auo her Iii cussion sprung up the relevancy
of certain circumstances stated by the witness, MIR
Van Pelt saying that he merely wished 70 show that
Mrs Fosters motives perfectly pure ~ contract
ing marriage With Foster, she believing al the time
the assurance Of her confidential counsel, that her
divorce had been obtained from Mr. Singer
Surrogate Cohin-You want % show that she was
properly married 10 Foster
~. + -.
oui desire g sho" that she was not only anxious 70
DolMH a divorce from singer, but had been told by
aer attorney that ne had entered up that J9denent
Ehen he had not, and that when ~ SIN weeks AFTER
hat lime she had married Foster, they threatened
er With
4 PROSECUTION ron BiGAMY,
and through this threat they back from her al tho
provision made ia the agreement tor her support,
leaving her absolutely penniless. The ia.
pers hcd BY her attorney we're gwen ap
TO Singer thus rendering her completely
poweress 10 regain her rights under n threat that II
she attempted TO il the matter he would hayc
her sent To the State Prison i0r bigamy We wish to
show that her conduct ia this matter has been rr.
prOachabe, and that she has been The victim a gtu.
pcuduous fraud on the part of tie deceased. Sho
nriny believed that she had been divorced from
Singer when she married Foster. Now, however. i
appears il will here be argued that her marriage was
Illegal and void but this has been her misfortune
Surrogate Coffin SAID that the question As - whether
she 10 obtain divorce or not could not be tried
there for IN case she afierward made m improper
marriage with another man II would not affect her
me witness was then Intercepted 70 the
Why be did not follow up
THK DIVORCE SUIT
for Mrs Singer gave his opinion that il would
not have been to her to have done AZ the
conclusion Oh the examination tho tried hard 10
~ permitted make personal explanation, but re-
ccycd encouragement from either the surrogate Or
tie counsel on both sides.
MIA Nary Ann FOsteriwas again called 70 the stand,
but her testimony manly related 10 the pubic ana pre-
vate recognition sho had received the wife Of the
tcstaor aud the mother Of their children IL is prob
able tha her croAs examination wl occupy the time q
Ne CoGrL to-day.