Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1885-09-27
MRS, MARKLEE SUES.
Fhe Sistcr.in-Law OF John Nichols
Seeks 20 Recover $4,000 from
His Estate.
Long Train of Indictments Charging s,s
'ematic swindling rpan "a. rar, OF
Trusted Adviser.

The legal complications which have
grown out Of the death Of John Michel,
Merc increased yesterday by a suit
brought by Mrs c. z. Markice against
Mrs Lizzie Nichols, as cxecutrix Of tho
Nichols estate, 10 recover yarious sans
alleged to bc due the plaintiff, agnrcpatinu
with interest about $50, 200. Mrs. MARI .
Zee j. the widow Of Jeremiah Markle, n
nail brother of John Nichols. Al Tho
death OF her husband In iss. She WAS ~,
pointed eNecutriN of his estate. which
was Dcqueathcd To her undivided. since
that time John Nichols had heen
acting as her agent up 10 hIs
ucath, aud IN that capneity
Is charged with Interpretations 10 tho
amount statedab0ye The petition is avery
Noiuminous, but nevertheless intercstini,
document. II sets forth.
That plnlntin was the cNccutrix of nor
husband, Jeremiah Marklcc. half brother
OF Johh Nichols, who died November 10.
That She made John Nichols her agent
ana custodian Of all the papers aud fluids
VI the estate.
That among those papers was a certain
note from John Nichols 10 Jeremiah
Marklec for $1,000, due August i,
1883, and which has never been
paid that since the death ofJohn Nichols
u cannot be found, aud that Il was either
lost or destroyed by him.
That ON the Isl day OF july, 1851.
Nichols executed a promissory note 10
Jeremiah Marklcc for $1,000, due ON do.
mand, ON which but S225 has been poid.
That plaintiff turned over 10 .Iobn
Nichols one note for $500, given by Tbos
Leach Bro. to Jeremiah Mnrklee. thai
he collected u small part Of ii aud took
new note for the balencc (s2B8 .sg). nay.
able TO HIMSELF which Is now held by the
defendant.
That AZ the time OF his death Jeremiah
Marklcc owned an undivided one.siNth
Interest IN what ~ known ms the Dahl.
man building On Houston street; that
Nichols has always collected the rent for
the same at the rate of 5000 per annun,
aud appropriated It TO his own use, and
That, nt the time Of his DEATH be was due
the estate of Jeremiah Marklcc on this
account $500.
That ON the goth day of February, 1884,
John Nichols, by check ON the
city National bank TO which he
signed plaintiffs name, caused said bnnk
to pay out of funds belonging TO plaintiff
the sum OF $500 that plaintiff owed TO
John A. Bergin & Son Tor monument
she had erected over the grave OF her
husband, jeremiah Mnrklce nndattachc6
the receipt Tor said money to said check.
That afterwards, to-wlt; ON March 3,
1881, SAID Nichols signed another check
by putting plaintiffs name thereto,
against the same hank and for the same
and imudulently caused said
bank 20 pay the sum OF $500 out Of
plaintiffs money In said bank, which she
AYERS was done for the purpose OF swim.
ding her out of thatRmount
That the plaintiff owed the city Of Fort
Worth S227 90 for taxes assessed against
the estate Of j. MarlSlce for the year 1897.
That on the LIST day of March, 1884, Il. l.. !
Maddox, then collector ut taxes for said
city, presented the claim OF said city,
for said amount 10 said Nichols, aud
as her agent he gave said X. T.. Maddox
check on said City National bank for said
sum, and took from said r. y. Maddox
his receipt for the tSNcs 50 due That
again on the 9Th day OF March, 1854, the
said Nichols attached said receipt TO his
check for the same amount, aud drew
another cheek payable 20 taX-rccelpl or
bearer, for said sum, and both Of
these checks, which were drawn
on said City National bank, were duly /
paid out OF funds belonging TO plaintiff /
and Nichols signed plaintiffs name to 4
both OF said checks,
That about the 9th day OF October I
1879, said John Nichols drew check on (
thc City National bank for the sum OF 7
$500, aud signed thereto The name Of i 4
Marklee, and the sum was paid when (
presented 10 John Nichols out Of said I
Marklec's funds; that said Nichols at (
once invested the same Ia the Matador
Cattle company for the use and benefit oi /
said j. Marklee. but took the shares 30 (
purchased Ia his own name, that after 1
wards Nichols sold ont said Investment /
and made thereon the sun OF $1,000 I
for said Marklec, and 80 reported [
to him; that after the death /
OF said hlarklec plaiuth permitted I
the said Nichols TO retain the said moneys /
which he always acknowledged aud never |
denied that be had and she Instructed 4
ldm TO rcinycst the same IN the Espuella I
Land aud Cattle company Tor her usci I
that up 10 the date of his death he always /
told plaintiff that he had 30 rcinNesled /
said money In said EspueIla company, I
but II be ever aid so be took (
the shares Ia his own name, /
or II he failed TO do so, then plaintldaycrs I
that he held at the time Of his death I
q 1880 OF the money belonging 20 the said I
Marklce estate, IN trust for her, and that !
the same has never been paid.
Plaintiff also seeks 10 cancel the gar 7
nIshments and attachments sued out by /
the City National bank against the estate
OF John Nichols, that all creditors OF the /
same class may share alike ia the pro-
ceeds