Connecticut western news., 1882-10-04
A REMARKABLE SUIT.
BITTER STRUGGLE BETWEEN LIFT
 INSURANCE COMPANY AND A WIDOW.


 BITTER STRUGGLE BETWEEN A LIFE
 INSURANCE COMPANY AND WIDOW.
 One of the most sensational suits ever tried in the west, came up in the United States Circuit Court at St. Louis. In 1858 William Wackerle, farmer at Carver, Minn., married Waeharga Schneider, and they lived together on the farm until 1862, when he enlisted in the Ninth Minnesota regiment. He served until 1865, when he was dis charged for physical disability. He then returned to the farm for year, when he sold it, and after that worked as common laborer and railroad hand at various places. In Milwaukee, Wis, he took out two insurance policies on his life, one in the Htna and the other in the Mutual Life, of New York, and both were made payable to his wife. In 1868 he moved to Sacramento, Gal, and in 1870 to Quincy, Ill. In the fall of 1872 he left her at that place, and was next heard of at Marshall, Texas. Shortly afterward he was employed on the Texas Pacific Railroad, near Shreve- port, La. On the 25th day of Decem- Der, 1872, 8 man was killed-run over by passenger train-near Shreveport, and at the inquest some papers were found on the body ndicating that the deceased was William Wackerle. This was not deemed sufficient indentifi- cation by the Coroner's jury, and they returned their verdict that the deceased was an unknown person.
 Mrs. Wackerle did not hear of the matter until January, 1873, and in the meantime had paid the premium on the two policies for that year. As soon as she was informed of the death she went to Marshall, Texas, and Shreveport, La., to gather evidence that the de- ceased was her husband. She submitted these proofs to the company, but they deemed them insufficient and refused to pay the insurance. She brought suit against the Htna in the State court of Louisiana, at Shreveport, retaining Hon. Alexander Boardman, now Judge of the United States District Court of Louisi- ana, as her counsel. On the trial she obtained judgment against the com pany, which appealed to the Supreme Court of Louisiana. Pending this ap- peal Joseph Wimman, an attorney in Minnesota in the employment of the insurance company, went to California and brought back man claiming to be William Wackerle, the supposed dead man. He was produced before the Su- preme Court, and numerous afidavits were presented testifying that he was the identical William Wackerle on whose life the policies of insurance were taken. Mrs. Wackerle, however, denied his identity and pronounced him fraud. The Supreme Court took different view and reversed the decision of the Circuit Court of Shreveport. On the strength of this decision Wackerle, real or ficti- tious as the case may be, applied to the government for pension and obtained it, drawing the full amount for eighteen years, from 1864 to 1880.
 Mrs. Wackerle brought suit in the United States Circuit Court for the St. Louis district against the Mutual Life, of New York. The plaintiff, Mrs. Wackerle, middle-aged woman, whose face bore the marks of many years anxi- ety and care, was placed upon the stand shortly before recess. She gave her evidence with many indications of sin cerity and struggled to conceal her emotions as the questions were put con. corning her husband. She told the story of her husbands alleged death and when the cross examinatio began came one of the most dramatic scenes ever witnessed in the court room there
 At this point man was brought ul to the witness stand and confronted with the witness and she was asked i she recognized him.
 A. I have never seen this man before O. Is he not John Wackerle, tn brother of your husband, and is he no the man you met at Carondelet on tn boat and who told you of the death o your husband
 A. This man is 8 stranger to me, am know nothing about him ; Johl
 Wackerle was large, tall npan, and thi looks altogether like another man. Another man was then confronte with her, and she was asked if she recoe nized him.
 A. This man is stranger to me, lik the one before saw him once in Mir nesota, but he is changed from what h
 was before; this man is not my husband I never lived with him as his wife;
 never saw him except in Minnesot
 once and here now; I never said t
 Durham that if this man had stayed
 Sacramento I meant to have divide
 the money with him when got i
 Plaintiffs counsel here rested her cast
 That of the defendant was then take
 up. Counsel stated what they intende
 to prove, and began the evidence b,
 reading several dispositions of partie
 who knew Wackerle who said that tn
 man produced was the real simon pure A Little Ahead.