Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1886-12-09

An Oid MaAsS Dual Life.
CURIOUS PROVISIONS o. ooDIcn AND QUESTION or
DoNICILE.
From the n Y. Herald Dec. g.
81 tffd not know that John Jermann, my FIRST
husband, was living when married Mr.. Call
sMr. Call introduced me AZ his wife and l regard
myself as his widow"
Such are some Of the facts set forth in an AMI
day1t submitted yesterday to Surrogate Rollins by
a woman signing herself Amelia GALL who claims
TO be the widow OF the late Joseph Gall, the wei
founded Is the question which surrogate Rollins
has TO determine. AT present IL is gooddeal tan
gled-a sort OF Chinese puzzle, In fact
NR. CALLS WILL
The exact situation OF the case and the puzz,ing
conundrum awaiting the surrogates solution can
very briefly be explained After the death VI Mr..
Calls wife, about three years ago, he went TO the
westminster hotel, where most OF HIS friends sup
posed he was living prior 10 his death, In May last
quested In his WILL by the side or his deariy be-
loved Wife," the viii was brought 20 light, ami IL
was found that Mr.. Gall had given 81 600 each to
land and San Francisco and the remainder OF his
estate altogether valued at 500 900. TO his nephew
Charles Funkenstein.
PULLING oopIcII.
The will was dated April 3, 1883, but there WAS
codicil dated April 2s, 1854, and It is this that
has brought about all the present trouble. Eere
are the pulling clauses:
Igive and baqueath 10 Amelie steele a former
servant OF my late wife, $1,000. J. give and
bequeath TO the child OF said Amelie, Betsy A.
5000
TO the latter bequest was added the direction TO
expend the interest In the maintenance and edu-
cation OF such child till IL reached the age OF four
teen, and then TO pay TO her the principal.
CLAIMING TO BE HIS WIDOW.
Everything promised TO go on very smoothly as
to the probate OF the will, and the requests would
probably all have been settled before this time had
not the Amelie steele referred to in the codc put
In claim to a dover right in the estate as the
widow or Mr.. Gall. This was the first complica-
tion. Another was the mention OF his child In the
gested a possible basis for the mothers claim.
Ihere arose a question OF jurisdiction: The al
Legged widow declared that Mr.. Gall resided at the
time OF his death in Brooklyn. On the other side
twas claimed that he was a resident in this city.
Serious complications arose out OF this question
OF residence. The contradictory evidence would
make It appear that this venerable Octogenai1sn
lived in his latter years dual lfe-that while his
intimate friends supposed him 70 be living the hfe
this city, he in reality had second wife In Brook
lyn in the person OF the former domestic In his
FAMILY. There was no pretended formal marriage
fact That two children have been born, the elder
being Betsy A GALL mentioned in the will, and the
latter Catharine Gall, a posthumous child born
TWO months after MIR. Calls death.
WIDOWS HUSBAND.
There was a flood OF conflicting affldavits the
subject OF residence. Meantime Messrs. Samuel
q. Barnard and NJ. j. Kenna counsel for the will,
left no stone unturned to disprove the averments
OF the alleged widow. They found, as has teen
already published that she has a husband now
living, an obscure umbrella maker named John
Jermann. His affidav1t was duly obtained and
submitted to the surrogate, and accusations OF
conspiracy and perjury were soon Forthcoming.
There was nothing like attempting an explana-
ton. An affiday1t OF the woman calling herself
Amelie Gall was however, read by Mr.. AdOlph
Sims, jr., her counsel
THOUGHT SHE WAS WIDOW.
In this afidavit she states that she is living
at No. 800 Lafayette place, Brooklyn. purchased
for her In the spring OF 1854 by Mr. GALL and that
her mother sister and her two children, OF which
Mr.. Gall is the father, live In the same house. She
says that she was married to John Jermann on
august % 1871, and lived with him until July,
1875, when he abandoned her. She did not know
that he was living when she married Mr. Gall, and
had not seen hin since they separated. Alter
leaving her husband she lived several months with
her mother, and AFTER that was employed first rs
domestic by Mr.. Gall In his house. No. 4 Ruther-
ford place, and afterward as housckeeper and
companion TO Mrs. Gall. She remained In the
family from January Ii, 1877, until the death or
Mrs. Gall on February III, 1888 After breaking
up housekeeping she occupied for time rooms
obtained for her by Mr. Cali In 10th street, and
thence moved to her present place or residence Ia
Brooklyn. On March :.22, 1Ss6 Mr.. Gall, she says
took up his permanent abode with her. and re-
manned until his death. She declares that he in
troduced her as his wife and that she regarded
he self As his widow.