The New York herald., 1879-07-06
WAS HIS WILL DESTROYED?

|
DRIED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS IN
POSSESSION OF THE WIDOW OF THIRD-A
WILL CASE DEFENDING ON PREVIOUS WILL.
PHILADELPHIA. July 2. 1872
Joseph Hopple died September q. lS74, ut the age
of sixty-six leaving widow, but issue. and pos
sessed of s15OOOO worth of property. which he had
inherited from his father, wealthy tobacconist.
Joseph willed this snug property to his widow.
except an $4,000 legacy to his adopted daughter.
Harriet C. Do Chsmont. The latter is dead. The
widows enjoyment Of the property is now rudely
disturbed by Joseph's two surviving brothers,
James and Richard B.. who. claiming to be his next
of kim demand the estate on two grounds-hrst.
testamentary incapacity; second. undue influence
The story told by the adavits and the testimony is
interesting, but somewhat complicated and involves
the question of the fate OF the will alleged to have
been made by Caspar Hoppe, the worthy tobacconist
and father Of the Hopple brothers.
A DESTROYED WILL.
Caspar Hopple, the father, died in 1859. leaving
$500 OOO but no will, as was believed. His heirs
were four sons-Joseph Whose estate is now being
squabbled over). Matthew (since dead) and Richard
b. and James (the present contestants). The
why the old gentleman was said to have died ntes
tate thus explained by the evidence Richard b.
HOppe, The contestantS:-
III know that Caspar Hopple made o will leaving to
his son Joseph lie interest. CONTESTANTS evil
shows that the father had no faith in his sons
business capacity and was ncenscd ut his adoption
OF Harriet Y. de Chamont; but this is rebutted.-
Rep.l l heard that will read in the presence Of
Joseph, Matthew and James, and Joseph de-
stroy that in presence; Matthew, who
the leading member OF the family, opened and
read the Will father the conditions OF that will
were that he gave Matthew, James and Richard
(mysel fourth part OF the estate Ill Tee simple and
the other remaining fourth he left to Joseph during
t,.ul ,Va 10 IA nnt fhnf
the fathers children and grandchildren; upon the
conclusion of the reading OF this will Joseph
appeared to to be the most distresseu-look-
ance manirestng great fear and anguish; Mat
thew, looking ut him. said Joseph, have you
adopted Harriet as your daughter9 Joseph an
swered Mo- Mathew then said, DO you ever intend
to adopt Aarret? he said, No, never wil;' Joseph
then sad Will you carry out the conditions OF your
fathers wilY Joseph said, i will; Matthew then
handed to Joseph his fathers will and Joseph tore
it up; James thereupon grew very excited. saying
it was y well known fact i'll the town OF Moscow,
Ohio, that his father (Caspar) had made his will
and threatened to prosecute Joseph: Matthew
turned to James and said James, Joseph has
promised carry out the conditions OF his fathers
will. and Joseph Will not lie; Joseph and Matthew
both gave us tue assurance that legal instrument
would be made to carry out that ntention never
that instrument. but it may be among the
shocked when Joseph perpetrated this out
rage OF tearing up his fathers will, and thought
il it were known it would send him to prison
and bring everlasting disgrace on our name; l
thought he did that he carried away by his
insane man. was not surprised at my father max
ing this kind of will (although had known that
he had made one) because he had stated to me that
he afraid from Josephs Weakness and his wife's
entire control OF him, that he might direct will
away his property outside of the family"
THE OTHER SIDE.
The argument of counsel for the will says:-It
is not perceived that the story of the alleged de-
struction of Caspar Hoppe's will by the decedent
and his alleged agreement in consequence is CT
any particular Importance in this The
story is very improbable one, is supported
~ tIra oA,fas
is entitled to no credit whatever. 1t is this
Upon the death of their father. Caspar Hopple, the
four brothers met together in room by them
selves and read their fathers Will. BY it each
lett equal proportion OF the estate, but
Joseph's tthe aecedent) was only Tor his LIE, with
Joseph became much agitated and tore up the will
in the presence of the brothers. and upon being
threatened with prosecution made promise TO his
brothers if they would acquiesce the
ton of the will he would leave all his property to
them by his will To this they assented, and took
from the decedent bond to that effect and that the
witnesses to the fathers will still living. They
have not been examined. nor has the Justice who.
they say, wrote it.
: THE MILD AND TrMIp JOSEPH
That the mild. timid and gentle Joseph should
have been allowed by his three brothers destroy
their fathers will before their faces when they
could easily have prevented it, or. at least.
ments that they should have finally acquiesced
in its destruction upon Josephs mere promise
leave them his estate by his will secured by his
own bond only. of which they had copy and
Joseph another that he should have made any such
promise. or they accepted 1T. he having then wfo
living who would have had her rights in the estate
that they Itisfed to make partition and
division OF their fathers large estate, CIV
ing to Joseph his share of the real estate
in absolute fee simple. and or the personal
estate absolutely (which was done.-Rep.l and al
low him always to hold 1t. and TO outside of
these brothers hearing of the transaction;
and then subscribing witness produced to show
that such will even ever executed, nor even the
Justice, who, they say, wrote 1t. and no such bond
that alleged carefully preserved and produced-is
q story too improbable aud absurd to claim SEM
blance of belief.
The adopted daughter of Joseph, who
daily disked by the rest of the family, died leaving
q daughter, who was always treated his grand
child by the testator. She lives with Joseph
Hopples widow, who has possession Of the $50, 900
worth of property left by her husband. The con-
test will he. n long and bitter one