New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1877-10-15
4 QUESTION or AGE.

Most people, il the question be suddenly put
to them, How old are your hesitate for a
moment and have to go through a mental cal
cniation before they can reply. In the later
wears of life many persons have a dislike for
thought on the subject of their age, and are
ant to become more or less torgetful rs to the
exact figures Perhaps this was the case with
the late DIR. McDonough, when he stated to the
Connecticut Mutual Life Insurance Company,
on March %, 1867, that at his next birthday
his age would be sxty-twO. At all events, when
the Doctor died about two years aGterward,
there was an affidavit among the proofs of the
death in which a Mr.. Nolan declared that ac-
cording to his best judgment the deceased was
of between sixty-six and seventy years of age.
The company disputed the claim on the ground
of fraud in the statement on which the policy
was effected. Quite recently the full text of
the decision of the United States Supreme
Court has been published, in which The fore
going circumstances are related. After the dis
crepancy between the Nolan affidavit and the
statement of the deceased Doctor became ap-
parent, evidence was offered to show that Nolan
was mistaken. The lower court permitted this
evidence; on the appeal it was determined that
the court was correct in giving this permission /;
the plaintiff had the right to rectify errors III
the statement of proofs of death.
But more curous piece of evidence was In
reserve. The company offered to produce the
minute-book of a lodge of Odd Fellows con-
tanning a record of the age.of DR.. McD3nough,
differing from that of the policy. Some time
after the record was made, the Doctor himself
became secretary Of the lodge. The lower
court refused TO admit this testimony, and is
now sustained in the refusal The secretary
who entered the age III the minutes may or
may not have been mistaken. DR.. McDOnOugh
NAV or may not have known how his age was
recorded. But in any case the book OF min
utes would be hearsay testimony. 1t was ar
gucd that written entries might be produced
where death prevented Cral evidence; but the
reply to this was that il was DR.. McDonOugh,
not the former secretary of the lodge, who was
deld No oral evidence from the secretary was
offered. So the ease ends with the defeat OF
the company its appeal.
But it il clear from this brief sketch of the
facts that here WAS an old gentleman whose
age was in doubt among his friends, and that
probably ne shared with them the uncertainty
OF the numerous questions which are put to
III hppl'hht i'i hi' ih'"idh'N' ih'i' di' ~"
that lac might 80 easily 90 astray IN answering
witthou intending any fraud. None of the
other questions are collateral to it, or framed
80 as to call attention to possible mistake in
the reply. The examining physician might tap
the applicants chest and listen to his heart for
an hour without being able to guess hls age
within "A half dozen years. Yet il M abso-
lutcly false statement of age could be proved,
il might yitiatc the policy. 1t seems as if
there was possibility of great hardship to the
survivors in such a case; II hardship which
could not be averted by an appeal to the law.
The chance OF such a mistake might be avoided
if some other evidence than that Of the appli-
cant were specifically required as to ms age.
At present, it would certpinly be well Tor peo-
pie about to insure their lives, TO take a look