Morris tribune., 1886-09-01

The Will Cuts One of His Daughters on
with But S1,0o0-In Her Suit She AL
irges That Hc Was Unduly Influenced
by His Rousekeeper - Story of the
Scandal.
n sSsSsSsSaESS ES9
CHICAGO, Aug. 30.-Mrs Harriet Corn
ing Rurch Morgan, discarded daughter of
the late Isaac Howe Burch, filed bill in
the circuit court Friday, to have the will of
her father set aside upon the ground tLat he
was of unsound mind and memory when he
made it, and was unduly influenced by his
housekeeper, Mary I. Spaulding. The suit
revives one OF the most famous scandals
Chicago was ever regaled with. 1t was
brought out in the application by Birch in
1860 for divorce from his wife, Mrs.
Mary W. 7. Burch. He charged her with
adultery, and it came out upon the trial
of the case at Napsrville, whence it was
removed, that the allegations were en-
tirely uufounded and were inspired by Miss
Spaulding, who had sinister and ulterior
motives in poisoning Burch's mind. The
Jury in the case found the charges utterly
groundless and refused to grant Burch the
divorce. The scandal created great excite
ment in this city, and Burch found it pleas
anter to leave With Miss Spaulding and
his oldest daughter, Mary Weld Burch, he,
in rS6l, went to Europe. He resided partly
in Paris and partly in Nice until 1888, when
he died Meanwhile Mrs Mary w. I.
Burch, his much maligned and injured wife,
sued him for divorce and for desertion, in
Wayne county, Michigan, and So
cured decree in 1861 Shortly
afterward she married a man named
Thomas F. Pomeroy. With her lived the
complainant in Fridays suit, Harriet Cor
ming Burch, who married man named
Morgan She was born in May, 1859, and
was Isaac Howe Burch's second daughter.
When her father and mother separated she
was years old. There were only two
children born to the couple, she and Mary
Weld Burch. She was taken by her mother,
while Burch took Mary. 1t was part of
Miss Spaulding's representation to Burch
which caused his separation from his wife
that Harriet was not his child, but that Of
David Stuart, who was the man with whom
it was alleged Mrs. Burch had committed
adultery. Stuart was law partner
of B. F. Aver, and, entering the
Union army in 1871, was killed at
the battle of Resaca. Burch believed
tnat Mrs Morgan, the complainant, was
not his daughter, and when he died he left
all his property, which was valued at $780,
700, to Mary Weld Burch, and cut Harriet
Morgan off with 1000 Mary Weld
Burch married in Paris Armand Demon
geat, and after his death she married Alex
auder Ribot At each of her marriages
Burch settled 20, 900 francs upon her as q
marriage portion. Throughout the period
Of his residence in Paris and Nice, Burch
was attended constantly by Miss Spauld-
ing, vino continued, so Mrs. Morgan
claims, to set him against the COM
plainant and his wife, and to pre-
dispose him in favor of his Oldest
daughter Mary. Mrs. Morgan claims that
1t was through her continued influence that
he cut her, the complainant, of with 81, 900.
Mrs. Morgan says she does not attempt to
analyze Miss Spauldings motives, and
don't know whether she loved Burch or
hated Mrs Burch, or was inspired by love
for the first daughter Mary. Burch left
his property in trust for Mary TO John De
Koven and E. W. Blatchford, of Chicago,
and Henry Farnam, of New Haven as ex-
ecutors. and the only other bequests in ad
dition to the $1,000 to Mrs. Nor
gan, the complaint, were $1,000 to
Horace NJ Burch, a brother, $500
per year to Mary Willis, sister, and 81 900
to the American Bible society. Mrs. Nor
gan makes the executors, Mrs. Ribot, her
husband, Alexander Ribot, Marcel Demon
geat, the formers daughter, Horace n.
Burch, and the American Bible society de-
PENDANTS, and the bill prays that the will
and codicil Of Burch be decreed to have
been made while under the influence of
Miss Spaulding, and that they be set aside as
not his last viii and testament She asks
also that one-half Of the property left
by Burch be decreed to her as an heir at
law