The Milan exchange. (Milan, Gibson County, Tenn.) 1874-1978, 1877-11-29

A Legal somance-A Man Die D.cIartnx
He HIS No Reiatives-rhey Turn I'D by
the Score.
From the Keokuk Qowa) Constitutional
Probably one of the most interesting
will contests on record is that Of Ber.
nard Slaven, which we have frequently
had occasion to mention in these col
umns. Slaven's first will was broken
in Court, and the property given to
some distant heirs. Since then other
heirs have turned up, and while present.
ing their claims in Court, to reopen the
case, other and nearer relatives step in
and establish better claims. Them to
cap the climax, Slaven's wife turns up
and puts in her claim at the same time
suit is being prosecuted to maintain the
claims of one of the legatees of the will.
The following is the history of this in
teresting case:
In August. 1874, an old gentleman
from Ireland, named Bernard Slaven,
died in this city. Before he died he
made will, devising his property,
about 81, 900, consisting of Government
bonds, to daughter of John Farrell,
Esq, where he had boarded a consider
able time, and for the benefit of institu-
tiOns of the Catholic Church, to which
he belonged. He was often heard to
say that he had no relatives, and it was
published extensively by the press of
the country that an old man had died
in keOkuk worth considerable property
and without heirs. About the time tho
will came to be probated, parties born
in Texas, consisting of Elizabeth, Kate
and Mary Ann, daughters of one Ed
ward Slaven, of Galveston, came for
ward and through their attorneys,
Messrs. Gilmore & Anderson, of this
city, contested the probate of SlaveH's
will on the alleged grounds of insanity
and undue influence. Hon. DE-. Miller,
Hon. John III. Craig and Hon. Geo. W.
McCrary defended the will for the lega-
tees, but the Circuit Court ruled against
the will and denied its probate, the Su-
preme Court, to which the case was
carried, affirming the decision of the
lower Court.
Shortly after the will was set aside,
another claimant came forward in the
person of Mrs. Ann Scully, who resides
ut Piqua, Miami County, Ohio, who
claimed that she was the sister and heir
of Bernard Slaven, and entitled to his
property and charged that the Texas
claimants were bogus. She employed
Hon. ID. +. Miller as her attorney to
prosecute her claims. lie united with
him his former legal associates, Hons.
John II. Craig and Gee. w. McCrary;
also there soon came forward another
set of persons, consisting of John Sla-
ven, Mary Slaven and Ann Slaven, of
Elyria, Ohio, who claimed to be chill
dren of Patrick Slaven of Ireland, de-
ceased, a brother of Bernard Slayen.
They were represented in Court by \.
j. Alley and ID. F. Miller
The trial of these conflicting claim
ants came on in the Circuit Court last
week, before Judge Drayer, and con-
! tinued three days and half, when the
attorneys for the Texas claimants in
. open court yielded the point that Ann
Slaven was a sister and the children of
Patrick Slaven were nephews and nieceS
of Bernard Slaven, and asked a cOntin-
uance until next term of Court on the
| question rs to heirShip of the Texas
| claimants.
The Court decided in favor of Ann
Scully and the heirs of Patrick Slaven
as lawful claimants, and continued the
case as to the Texas claimants and for
proof whether Christopher Slaven, a
brother of Bernard, in Ireland, was liv-
ing, or, if dead, whether he left any
heirs.
Mr.. Farrell's daughter, by her present
attorneys, Sprague & Gibbons, has a
suit now pending in the Circuit Court
to try and secure to her the $4,000 de-
vised to her by Slaven's will.
A large number of dispositions were
taken and read on the trial here, and
one very aged but intelligent gentleman
from Ireland, named Flood, testified
that he knew the whole Slaven family
in Ireland intimately; was a near neigh
Dor, and worked by the side of Bernard
Slaven for three years before he came
to the United States in 1888, and that
Mrs. Ann Scully and the children of
Patrick Scully he knew to be the rela-
tives of Bernard Slaven, deceased, us
above stated.
1t also appeared in evidence that Ber-
nard Slaven had been married in 1888
or 1889, in Champaign County, Ohio,
and that he deserted his wife after hay
ing two children by her, and that she,
in 1874, obtained a divorce from him in
one of the Ohio courts and married
man named Journal, with whom she
now lives. Bernard's children died
thirteen years before he did, and now
Mrs. Journal has come into court by
her attorney, j. G. Anderson, Esq, and
filed claim alleging that she, as the
mother of deceased children of Bernard
Slaven, is heir to all the estate. Her
claim is contested by the administrator,
VIM. Leighton, of this city, and the re-
corded heirs of,Bernard Slaven.
Probably in a year or fifteen months
from now all these jarring interests will
be settled by legal adjudication.