The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-05-21
ISAAC M. SINGERS WIDOWS
THE BITTER CONTEST OYER TWO
WILLS AND sf4,0O0,00O.
SURROGATE Cohin's Acceptance ofOnc VIII, and
nm English Courts Probate Of fAnotbcr-The
American Execufar'e EauixacnI Acfinn.

Inc disclosures OF the private life OF the
late Isaac N. Singer, the sewing machine In
ventor, developed in the contest OF his will by
Mrs. Mary Ann Foster, In claiming to be bis
widow, are likely to be further Increased In suits
before the Circuit Court In white Plains In June.
The appeal from the adverse decision Of Surro- |
gate Conn In her right to intervene in the pro-
batting Of the will In December last, was argued |
before the General Term 10 Poughkeepsie last |
week, but q decision has not yet been given. |
In the mean time Mrs. Foster, through her coun- |
sci, Mr.. X. W. Van Pslt. began action against |
Mr.. David Hawley OF Yonkers, the executor of
the estate. to enforce her dover right n property
In Yonkers. In an examination before Judge
Dykman yesterday, Mr.. Hawley said that In the
last years OF MIR. Singers life he was his agent
and attorney; that he was called to England In
July, 1875, to execute will for Mr.. Singer; that
the will was executed on July IA, 1875, by Mr..
Eistley. a solicitor, while Mr. Singer was on his
death bed in Paignton.
This acknowledg gment OF a will OF later date
thon the one he offered for probate before Sur
rogate CONN In December last and that he had
copy Of It, was followed by those questions
and answers:
Mr.. Van Pelt-Did you inform the Surrogate
OF westchester county Of the existence OF the
OF the will OF 1902
MIR. Hawley i told him that there was another
Mr. Van Pet"Dd YOU show him a copyS
MIR. Hawley--I don't think did.
Mr.. Van Pet-Did he ask to see it2
Mr.. Hawley-1 think not.
Mr.. Van Pelt-Are you certain that he did not
Mr.. Hswiey-Tbst would be my impression.
He paid very little attention to It.
Mr.. Van Pelt,pid he ssk no further questiousf
MIR. Hawey-I don't think that he did.
Mr.. Van Pelt-Did he not ask YOU to produce
copy so that he could see for himself?
Mr. Xsp :s dd cs9ssr aow Il
Porter. who were my counsel.
This testimony was subscribed and sworn TO
In tho contest OF the will In December, Mr.
Charles OCcnor was advisory counsel for Mrs.
Isabella Eugenia Singer. tho last wife OF Mr.
John X. Porter appeared as her counsel. Mr..
J. C. Carter represented the executors Interests:
Tho will OF 1870, offered as the last will
Foster, devised his estate in England, valued At
$5,OOoOoO, to Isabella Eugenia Singer. whom
country. OF which an inventory has been ned
for sso000c0, thlrty-eieht xteths were devised
twenty-five portions were devised In different
proportions TO the eighteen children OF four
| as acknowledged IN the Will. Tho will OF July
IL. 1875 nine days before Singers death, devises
all .he pr0psry Sel 10 EDSand ma b, .5bnve 10 iss s
quests to bis other relatives are the same as In
the will Of 1870. The win OF 1875 has been ad
mitted to probate in England on the petition Of
| DIR. Pridham named as executor.
THE ENGLISH ESTATE.
| From facts CLEANED by Mr.. Van Pelt and his
I tne .rs nv
| tho agent for the Singer Sewing Machine
MsngtastuEng Company in England and and
Eueenis singer and her children his en-
.s ueS at sa,oc5ooo Befors singer died the tho prop %
ertv had increased to about s5oO0.O00. This
ansssInes, to the agents aud attorney. Of SINGER.
| In the correspondence from Solicitor Esstley
rious r SO questions raised about the Mads%c tMrs
| Isabella Eugenia Singerl being tho law ul wife
OF Mr.. Singer, and also the legitimacy OF her
children" and he presented points OF English
law that II they were married under IAN as
after 1.-THE publication OF the bsnns. It Is void |;
but under a special license It is valid"
Mr.. Fosters counsel have proofs that Mrs.
| Isabella Eugenia Singers maiden name
Bower, and that she was married to Mr.. Singer
under the assumed name of Somerville
| Under this condition Of an irs, the trust deed
| would be set aside as being founded on I'M
moral consid ration, namely, ccncuoinage, II
| Mrs. Isabella Eugenia Siugcr was not Singers
lawful wife. TO provide against this being
proved, and In case any other legatee should
contest SINGERS VII oi r is.o, ana attempt to
| Singers wife, and her children illegitmate.
Solicitor Eastley endeavored to impress Mr.
| Hawley with the Importance VI so constructing
| the will to be made IN 1875 as to leave no loop
| hole for Mrs Isabella Eugenia singer to be de-
| will Mrs. Isabella Eueenia singer was infinitely
| described, both In parentaRe and personnel (;
particmlarized. as though they were Outside
| legatees, and not as wife " and children who
were legitimate offspring, as In the Will Of 1870
| PREPARING ron AN ADVERSE DECISION.
Singer died on July q. 1875. His will OF 1870
| was offered for probate by Mr.. Hawley as his
| last will, and after the hearing GO Mrs Fosters
claims 1t Was admitted to prob' .. Mr.. Cush-
| way young T., gllshfnan who mi tried a cousin
| OF Mira. lsabeils Tugenia singer and acted us
SINGERS private SO. eIary 10 the asst wears OF hi,
| reported the progress VI .hs contest to the
| English attorneys.
actions Of his client caused the English execu-
| tor TO offer the will Of 1875 in England for pro-
This would prove that Mrs. Isabella Eusenia
| Singer was not Singers wife, and that her
children are Legitimate; they would, there
| fore, be compelled TO resort to the will OF 1873,
| which was especially prepared for such an
emergency, 1he anomaly Is, therefore, pre-
% wessehsster rec county the viii Of $50 as the last
will, and Dr. Pridhsm Offering for prob te In
| England the will of 1875 the last will. The
proof OF these actions by singers representa-.
| tves will be produced In the actions instituted
by Mrs, t, Foster In ~ the Jung Circuit Court. h
that Surrogate Conn neglected bis duty In not
demanding that the Will Of 1915, which Mr.. Haw-
| ley mad In his possession, be produced before
| him. The Surrogate, IN his decision Of the 10th
| OF January last said:
THE LEGAL PHASE.
tons 10 the facts before us It is quite apparent that
|
recognized us the widow of the decedent Her rcls-
tons with him were merericous IN their inc ptlon.
Eth fu knowledge on ner part that taey were such.
TO their marriage. either ceremonial or lnferenuaL
learned counsel nat any marriage could DC established
MN from his wife but I. Is insisted that after ha,
| period, the imprdmtnt having been removed,
must infer marriage from the fact Of Their having
lived together cOlaDited together. and been recog-
nizcd Dy their aequautances husband and wife Tor
OF six mOaths but to such Inference there
| are serious obstacles. Flrs there was change
from the inct relations already established, the
mOysl the impedment OF itself operating such
| change. Second, change OF the relation
ulely refused to be maze by him. lhlrd after such
refusal she sim continued iOr months to live VITA
| hun as She had done before. Fourth, they ceased
I've together forever .i'er me separation In August
II therefore reach the conclusion tnat Mrs Foster,
the applicant In this proceeding is not the OF
| Mr.. Singer. but tnat Mrs. lsaOea Eugenia singer,
named In the VIII propOuni led lady whose character
Is In way impugned BY or Involved IN the matter,
which bound TO consider as ABOVE ieproach,
is the widow OF the deceased anu her chidron his legt
| innate offspring.
Immediately after the examination OF Mr..
| Hawley, Mr. j. c. Carter offered demurrer to
| another complaint OF Mrs. Mary Ann Foster
| against W. C. Waring, who occupies property
| in Yonkers belonging to the Singer estate, on a
| bill OF equity for her dover right in the estate,
foh nod not han dina rah m har Inn