The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1876-07-13

WntTt, us DlN dnu AiNSh iOi VIZ
wards of thirty years and the honored
name he bore and lett behind him shall not
rest under any such accusation, at least SO
far as | have il my power to prevent it.
After the substitution of policies had been
contaminated | relied with entire conf
dence upon the law to protect me in the
possession of my rights.
The act Of June 23d, 1873, provides that
no policy in favor of married woman,
shall be surrendered to and purchased by
the company issuing the same, unless upon
her written request, duly acknowledged by
her, before a commissioner of deeds, or 9TH
er officer, in the same manner as required
by law, to pass her dover right IN lands of
her husband. And | also relied upon the
solemn pledge of your company set out up
on the printed applications, that "this
company cannot entertain any proposition
on the part of the husband to change the
interest in a wife's policy, while said poll
cy is in force in her favor"
Ny husband continued in his usual health
until about the first of June 1875, nearly
two months after your company had is
sued the policy. He then began to decline
rapidly. On the 18th day of June, the dis
ease under which he was suffering, in the
language of the decision, chad made ex-
and feeble condition, physically, and his
mind to some extent impaired and affected,
and he was not capable of properly trans
acting business and ''that on the said last
day" (you) "the said Fayette z. Brown
called upon the said John NJ. Stillwell at
the house of the said Stillwell in the city
of Yonkers, and by means of persuasons,
intimdations and threats induced and CO.
creed him, the said John M. Stillwell, to
give up and surrender TO the defendant"
(your company "rhe said policy of insur-
ance, SO issued by the defendant to" (me)
"the plaintiff, upon the life of the said
John NJ. Stillwell without the knowledge
and consent of the plaintiff, and against her
will and wishes" 1t is true that you drew
your check, payable ID my order, for the
amount of the premium which your com
pany bad received, and gave it to my hus-
band at the time you extorted from him the
policy, and 1t is also true that at my hus-
bands request wrote my name on the
back of the check, but he received and used
the mony for his own purposes, and had
not the least idea of what the paper was,
but simply put my name upon it as he de-
sired and | would have done anything that
he asked me to do
You say in your Statement" that,
''shorty thereafter he" (my husband)
''called at my Office accompanied by Mrs.
Stillwel and surrendered the policy to the
ompany-executing a release therefor and
received a check etc.
This, pronounce to be absolutely and
unquallfedly false, and you know it to be
so. l never was at your office on any oc-
casion whatever, and testified before the
court. / only saw you once to know you,
and that was when you called at our house,
| on the 18th day Of June, to induce my
husband to give up the policy, and then
you saw him alone in the parlor. did not
| know the nature of the business you came
upon, but supposed it was merely friend
| ly call because lie was sick | would also
remind you that you swore on the
trial, that l did not come to your office,
| and that you never saw me in rela-
ton to this surrender. This testimony
was taken down by the stenographer of
the court, and he is ready to verify it.
You further say that the merits of the case
upon the contract of insurance are not
property involved in this decision; that if
such an action should be brought the com-
pany will defend it; thus implying that
the company have merits which have not
as yet been brought out. l would suggest
to you that you return to me the policy at
once, in order that such an action can be
brought and those merits may be made to
appear as soon as possible for the interest
| of the company itself. You will have
nothing to fear by taking this course, but If
| you are in the right everything to gain by
it.
| would, however, call your attention to
the answer put in, in this action, in which
all the matters you allege as avoiding and
vitiating the policy, are set up, and If they
had been proved the decision IN this case
undoubtedly would have been IN favor of
the company. the court, after hear
ing all the testimony, including your own,
expressly refused to find that my husband
had made any untruthful statements to you
whatever, when he applied Tor the policy,
which refusal is also on file with the clerk.
DR.. Flagg testified that he had been our
family physician for many years, and that
my husband had no disease or difficulty
that tended to shorten life DR.. Upbam
also tended him IN his last sickness. and il
he could have testified to anything that
would have helped your case, why did you
not call him as witness
You, however, did your best and your ut
most in the swearing line. You did not
hesitate to go upon the stand and give the
most immodest, indecent and revolving tes-
timony ever given in a court of justice, and
based entirely upon admissions, which you
said my husband had made to you at your
Office, when he surrendered the policy, in
order to make out your technical defence
of breach of warranty, consisting OF "con-
genital malformation," which If it had eX-
isted as you claim, had nothing whatever
to do with the disease of which he died, but
the existence of which | positively denied,
and produced my two children before the
court as loving witnesses of its falsity.
Now, you have at length succeeded in
getting all the facts of this case before the
public as they were before the court, and
they will be enabled to judge, whether the
decision of the judge was partial one sided
and unjust towards you or your COM
pany.
| now complain against you, and charge
you, in this public manner, upon these in
controvertible facts, with being the direct
cause of all the distress and disaster which
has been inflicted upon me; that you have
done your utmost TO destroy me and my
children, and that you have been sctuated
in your whole dt aling toward my husband
and myself by ercenary and selfish mo-
tives, simply r. garding us subjects with
which to advance your own interests.
You caused my husband to give up the old
policy, when you alone would b. the gain
er by it, and compelled him to give up the
new one as soon as you saw that you were
likely to be the loser by it.
You invaded our Eoust hold, when he
was stricken down with disease, and
threatened with death, and puroined from
my posse sion the policy which was my
own exclusive and sacred property, so that
could not bring an action upon it and col
lect it. You thereby assumed TO decide
the case, IN advance, in your own favor,
without judge or jury. and without giving
me an opportunity to be heard.
You deprived my husband of the conso-
lation of leaving his family in possession
of the provision, which it was the chief
aim and struggle of his life to secure to
them, beyond any risk or possibility of
failure.
You embittered his last days on earth