St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1889-07-16
In Important Cases Handed
Down by the Supreme
Court.
Question Of Marital Right In
volved in an Ante-Nup-
tial Contract.
The Cantieny Murder Case
Recalled by a Suit to
Recover.
In Accident Insurance, the
Insured Must Observe Due
Caution.

The supreme court yesterday disposed
of the appeal in the matter of the estate
of John B. Hosford, Fear B. Rowe, ct
al, appellants, VS.. Carrie M. HOsford,
respondent. A man having large eS-
tate, who had been once married and
who had six children living, entered
into an ante-nuptiai contract prior to a
second marriage. He was over seventy
years of age, and the proposed wife
thirty-nine. This contract provided
that the wife shonld, upon his death,
have absolutely one-seventh of all his
estate in lieu of the one-third interest
to which by law she would be entitled !;
and also that in case the husband should
survive the wife, the same interest in
his estate should, upon his death, de-
scend to her heirs and personal repre-
sentatives. The respondent, Carrie M.
Hosford, is the widow of the deceased,
John II. Hosford. The appellants are
his daughters by former marriage.
BY an order of the probate court for the
distribution. of the estate, the respond
ent, the widow. was allowed to take in
accordance with the statute as though
her rights were not affected by the ante
nuptial contract. The daughters of
the deceased appealed to the district
court. Three questions were sub
mitted to the jury, by which
they declared that an ante-nuptial con
tract was executed, but denied that it
was afterwards destroyed by the de-
ceased subsequent to his marriage, with
the knowledge and consent of his wife.
The widow, who claimed the more
favorable provision by law rather than
that made by the terms of the ante
nuptial agreement, moved for a new
trial upon the ground among, others, OF
newly discovered evidence. The lower
court granted new trial upon that
ground, and from that order the appeal
was taken. The appellate court finds:
1T was to be presumed from the dis
parity of ages that the husband would
die first, and it being for his interest to
retain the larger control of his property
allowed by the contract, a declaration
by him thatit had been annulled would
be admissible after his death as evil
dence that such was the fact; being a
declaration against interest. Newly
discovered evidence of this character
held to justify the trial court in grant
ing new trial upon that ISSUE"
OfInterest to Accident Insurers.
Hattie E. Hull fails in her appeal
against the Equitable Accident Associ-
alton of New York. Mrs. Hull is the
widow of Edward A. Hull. The latter
was insured in the respondent COM
pany, and was shop hand OF the
Northern Pacific Railroad company.
While being carried homeward from
the shop at the close of the days work,
upon Que of the company'S trains, Hull
went out upon the platform while the
train was in motion, intending to get
off when it should stop, for the purpose
of crossing over by a switch to another
track. He was thrown off and killed.
Deceased had entered into contract
with the defendant company, by the
terms of which the latter insured from
death or disability from accidental
causes, the plaintiff being named IN the
contract as the beneficiary in case of
his death. At the trial. when the plant
ifs case was presented, the court
granted motion to dismiss the action
for the reason that the accident and
death occurred under circumstances
bringing the case within the express OK
ceptions in the contract as to the llabIl-
ity OF the defendant, which set forth
STANDING. being or riding upon the
platform of moving railway coaches, or
riding in any other place not provided
for the transportation of passengers. .
-. are hazards not contemplated or
covered by this certificate" The
supreme court hold that the case was
within the specific exceptions in the
contract, and the insurer was not
liable.