The Wellington enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 1867-188?, 1880-11-11
A Case Of Disputed Identity.

The case of the Youngses, as curious in
many respects as the famous Tichborne
case, was taken up in the Surrogate's
Court yesterday. The man claiming to
be Theophilus Youngs, whose identity
is the point now in dispute, is not
claimant, but appears in aid of his
brother, in opposition to a suit brought
by his wife, the legal status of which
rests upon the allegation that Theoph-
illus Youngs is dead. The case grows
out of an Inheritance to q share in
which Theophilus Youngs was entitled.
The distribution of the property which
is situated in this citv was delayed by
lawsuit, which was attended to by Henry
Youngs, the older brother of Theoph-
illus, and who was the executor of the
estate in litigation. Theophilus re-
ceived advances on his claim from his
brother, amounting in all to 81, 200, and
in 1870, at the time when the last sum
was paid him on this account, and when
the prospect of q decision in their favor
seemed very uncertain, he, together
with his wife, made over to Henry
Youngs all his rights in the estate in
consideration of the amounts already
received. The suit resulted in favor of
the Youngses, so that Henry Youngs
made q good bargain when he bought
out his brothers interest. Theophilus
Youngs appears to have done nothing
more in the matter, however, aud no
action was taken about it until after his
death was reported in Boston, in
February, 1876. He had disappeared,
and body in the morgue was identified
as his. In October, 1877. his widow
obtained letters of administration from
Surrogate Calvin and Immediately
sued Henry Youngs for the share of
Theophilus in the estate, claiming that
the sale of his interest was invalid.
Henry Youngs replied by an action for
the revocation of the letters of admins
tration, on the ground that his brother
was not dead. He obtained an injunc-
tion staying her suits against him until
the case before the Surrogate should be
settled.
A good deal of evidence in the case,
in the shape of affidavits and of testi-
mony taken before a Commissioner, in
Boston, has heretofore been submitted.
II is very conflicting. On the one
side were produced witnesses who pos
itively identified the body found as that
of Theophilus Youngs, and witnesses
came forward for the other side who
declare that they had seen and, in some
cases, talked with Theophilus Youngs
since the date of his alleged death. In
the meantime man claiming to be
Theophilus Youngs himself turned up,
and has since been living quietly in this
city, stunning public observation. Mrs.
Theophilus Youngs once made applica-
ton for his arrest as an impostOr, but
nothing was done in the matter. If an
impostor, he had never attempted to
impose on her, for he refused to 60
near her. They met for the first time
yesterday before Mr.. Edward F. Under
hill, who was appointed by Surrogate
Calvin to take testimony in the case
in this city. A man about for
ty years of age, of medium height, with
light eyes and q sandy .mustache, came
into the court in company with Henry
Youngs. He said that he was Theophi-
lus Youngs. Referee Underhill asked
Mrs. Youngs whether this man was heI
husband. She looked at him for mo-
ment and then said, in loud tone
"That is not my husband"
Henry Youngs was then put on the
witness stand. He identified the man
who called himself Theophilus Youngs
as his brother and as the husband ol
MARY u. y. 1OunSS- Ctrly III AuSuSL
he said, he received a letter from his
brother, asking him to meet him or
August in the law Office of E. G. Drake
in this city. He met his brother on the
appointed day, and saw him often from
that time to August "a. He identified
his brother by a popularity in the for
nation of one of his finger nails and o
his lower teeth.
Sophia Youngs, a sister of Theophi
lus, also identified as her brother tn,
man who called himself Theophilu
Youngs.--N Y. Sun.