The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-04-18

Chew are an emphatic denial, but they do no
outwe gh the force of the direct and oroumstan
tial evidence in favor Of the execution OF thi
will Ia this connection will consider the tes
timony of Mr.. Brown, which ID urged to invall
date that of Mrs. smythe. and the letter Q
Bellechasse to Mr.. Cox, as tending u. t.
81 show the tssms y the will Mr. s'' Bfo@
testifes that Mrs. smythe visited in hi
family the summer after Mr. Clark's death; tina
she spoke often and most particularly about hi
death and estate and never referred to the vii
Of 1918. II these statements are to considered
~ properly in evidence, they are to be consid
cred as urged against the witness, to whose atten
ton they were never called, and who, therefore
never had an opportunity to explain, or by Other
testimony rebut them. Mrs. Smythe was evl
IDENTIFY attached to Myra, now Mrs. Gaines, whom
she had sucked, and may have considered tina
there was no good then to be derived by her IL
speaking OF the will; or. what is equally possible
she may have made reference TO 1t which Was moi
understood or was forgotten by Mr.. Brown. a
number of Witnesses attest her entire respeota
bility and credibility, and taking Browns testi
mony in the most favorable light, 1t does not me-
cessary contraiot and cannot avail to materially
weaken the Testimony Of q disinterested witness
clearly intelligent, and proved by numerous wit
nesses to be Trustworthy.
As to the letter OF Bellechssse to Mr.. Cox, Pro-
bate Record, page 855, Vol. l. he is recorded III
SAYING: 81 was one OF his t1ecntors. as well as
Messra. Rolf, De Ia Croix and Pilot" Thus ad
ding Relf in addition to the executors who he
and Mrs Smythe say were named in the last will
But in the next sentence, with reference to his
avowal Of having received conveyance OF nifty
one lots in secret trust for Myra. now Mrs
Gaines. he uses the same names and in the same
order. This all appears as trans alton, tbs
French original having mysteriously disappeared
Now ii is quite possible that either in writing out
the translation OF the letter the copyst may have
fallen into the error OF using all the three names in
1, a rnIla p n N frat
might not have stood in the original, or in the
original letter; If. rs Beleohasse ststeF he wrote
through amanuensis and by diotati2n, the
name of Relf may have by mistake clipped in in
one of the oolocations, although tho writer never
designed il tc be there, and never observed that
1t was there.
Now, as to Belecbasse, with the exception Of
this letter to Cox, there is nothing in the record
to impugn or qualify what he says; his language
and ideas throughout are those OF an eal nest,
cbiyalrous man, who is entirely sincere There
is further fact that upon the death of CLARK he
avowed that the ffty-one lots OF ground had been
placed in his name in secret trust for Clark
daughter, now Mrs. Gaines 1t seems to me that
he appears not only az an unimpeached, but as n
thoroughly upright witness, and | have never
read testimony which has impressed me as utter
ing more frankly the truths.
think then that the testimony OF Mrs. Smythe
and that of Bellechasse is unshaken, and they es-
tablish the will. But they are not alone. DE Ia
Croix himself was witness in favor OF the seq
ond will though subsequently he sought to vary
his testimony. On page 10 of the probate record
he says: "Csrk, come months previous to his
death. asked me to become tutor to Myrs;" that
a month or two after this conversation he, depe
nent, called to see CLARK, who had his house on
the Bayou Road; he found him in his cabinet and
had just sealed up packet, the superscrlption
on which WAS "a follows: "Pem efTe omus,t en- cas-
de mort" that Clark threw it down in presence OF
deponent and told him that il contained his last
will and other papers which would be OF service.
It in to be observed, as the Supreme Court OF
Louisiana noticed, this superscription efectually
proves that this envelope must have contained
will other than that of the will Of 1911. The tes-
timony Of Boisfontaine. at page 10 OF the probate
record states that Clark in hts last Illness spoke
to him about his last will and testament, and told
deponent that he had left the greater part Of his
property to his child, MyIa, and that he had
made disposition in his last will to that erect.
He says Clark always told him (deponent that
Myra was his daughter; that he loved her, and
would leave her all that he could as father It
Ia to be observed that Bellechasse's testimony,
at page 1862 of the probate record, in reply to
the 18th cross interrogatory states that Judge
Pilot the Judge of the Court of Probates,
ut New Orleans, examine 1.-The will after 1t was
finished. Mrs. Marian Rose Davis, at page 1877
Of the probate record, IN answer to tie l9th
lnterrogatory, says: s'When we were about
said that she, Myra, would be his heir; that he
intended to leave his estate to her. He spoke in
terms of great affection and pecuniary ambition
about her, and again said that he should leave
her all his estate his ambition Was st mulsted
to make her very rich" Again, in answer to the
2lst interrogatory, enc spoke Of her as his
heir, and in speaking OF her education said he
wished her educated in q manner suitably to take
in society the standing of The heir to his estate.
Samuel b. Davis, page liz, in answer to the
twelfth interrogatory, says: MIR. Clark always
did manifest the warmest affection and deepest
interest towards his daughter he has repeatedly
told mo that he intended to leave her his prop
erty, and / never doubted that he was entirely
sincere" TO the eighteenth interrogatory. on
the same page, he says: Il heard him
CLARK on oil occasions express himself in favor
OF her Mrs. Gaines) as his daughter and heir;
it WAS every day conversation when we
met" In answer to the twenty-frst interrogs-
tory, at page i73, he says: SIT was impossible
for any father to have manifested more soIici-
tude and affection than he did. In my last nter-
view with Mr. Clark his conversation turned al
most exclusively on the subject OF his child; 1t
was then that received the instructions relative
to her education, about which he seemed to be
very solictous, and about the place he wished
her to take in society when she arrived at the
years Of maturity"
VIM. Miller, at page 179 Of the Probate Record,
says, in answer to the twelfth, thirteenth and
fourteenth points: "Lhat Clark frequently ex-
pressed much affection for the said child Myra,
and stated that he intended to make ample pro-
vision for her as one OF his heirs."
II human testimony can establish fact. it 10
here proved by overwhelming testimony that it
was the settled purpose of Ozark to make Myra
his heir by his last will; that for some reason,
probably that stated by the SuIreme Court in the
oath Of Howard and 9th of Wallace, he did not
during his lifetime wish publicly to acknowledge
her 40 his child, or admit the marriage with her
mother, but that to all his friends he admitted
that she was to be his heir. Now, can any rea-
son be suggested why Daniel CLARK, when the
shadows Of death gathered round him, should
have changed his purpose to have done this late
Justice to daughter to whom he was
10 devotedly attached, and from whom
he had withheld the enjoyment of the rights to
which, as his child, she was entitled? II seems
to me not. 1t seems to me that as his years ad-
vanced his attachment to his child and his pur-
pose to provide for her by his last will, as was
natural, continued to increase. Now, when we
add to this the clear and undisputed testimony OF
Mr.. smythe and Bellechasse as to the terms OF
est, and precisely such one as father with the
settled purpose, which the other witnesses testify