The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1889-11-09
THE JOHN FUNK MATTER.

| THE JOHN FUNK MATTER.
The Probate Court room, on Friday
last, presented the livelest legal till
that has occurred in Ottawa growing
out of the John Funk matter.
| AT 10 o'clock, the matter being
called, Judge Gilbert arose and sug,
gested to Judge Evans that, owing tC
the strained relations existing be-
tween his Honor and Mr.. Funk, grow.
ing out of litigation pending, he prob.
ably Of his own motion would desire
someone else TO hear the petition. re
this Judge Evans replied that while
he had felt some delicacy about adj.
justing the final settlement of the
Reddick estate. he did not feel that
there would be any improperly in his
sitting As Judge in this matter, and
that he would hear it.
| At = p. IN. a motion was made tC
hamper the case with Circuit Court
based on an affidavit by John Funk,
containing among other things the
following:
! Atiiant further says, that in the
month of March, 1887, the Hon. Dan
lei Evans, who was then and ever
since has been, and now is Judge OF
the Probate Court of La Sale County,
Illinois, obtained from this atfiant the
sum of $500 by fraud and miSrepre-
sensations connected with suit there
tofore pending in the Circuit Court OF
La Sale County, Illinois, involving
the validity Of the last will and tesla
ment Of William Reddick, deceased;
that subsequently, upon the discovery
| by this atfiant Of such fraud and mis-
the 22d day of April, A. ID. 1889, this
atfiant brought in the Circuit Court of
said La Sale County, Illinois, his suit
in aSSumpist against the said Daniel
Evans for the recovery Of the money
obtained by fraud and misrepresenta-
tion, as aforesaid, which said suit is
still pending undisposed of in said
Circuit Court.
That after the institution of said
suit the said Evans has, as this atfiant
is informed and believes, and SO
charges the facts to be, commenced to
look about for some means to injure
afiiant and prevent the recovery, by
atfiant, against him, said Evans, in
said suit: and about the month OF
July, A. ID. 1889, said Evans employed
and induced one William ii. Barnum,
a member Of the firm of Barnum,
| Evans & Barnum, attOrneyS-at-laW, OF
Chicago, Illinois (of which said firm,
the son of said Daniel Evans, is a
member), to 60 to Europe and visit the
petitioner in this cause with view or
causing a suit to be instituted by pc
titionerS against this atfiant; that in
pursuance of the solicitation of said
Evans, said William II. Barnum went
to Europe for the purpose of investi-
eating and instigating said SUIT;
that by means of the solicita-
ton of said Barnum, he being
instigated by said Evans, as aforesaid,
said petitioners were induced to lille
and prosecute in the Circuit Court OF
said La Sale County their certain bill
of chancery, copy of which said bill,
filed in said Circuit Court, on the LIST
day of October, A. ID. 1889, is hereun-
to annexed, marked Exhibit A" and
made part of this affidavit, upon
which said bill process was duly
served upon this atfiant more than ten
days prior to the first day of the Octo-
Der term of said Circuit Court, this
atfiant did, on or about the oath day of
October, A. ID. 1889, file in said Circuit
| Court an answer to said bill, and said
| bill is still pending and undiSpOSed of
, in said Circuit Court in said La Sale
County: that at the solicitation and
instigation of said Evans said Mayo
& Widmer were likewise employed by
said Evans in the prosecution of the
said bill of chancery, as well as in the
prosecution of petition filed herein;
Atfiant further says that the 81, 500,
so paid by said afiiant to said Evans,
was paid in and about the settlement
of said estate involving the will Of the
said William Reddick, deceased, and
, that atfiant is informed by his counsel
and verify believes that the said pay
ment will necessarily be matter in
vOlved in said suit in chancery as well
as in petition herein, that the said
Daniel Evans has interest therein and
incapicated from acting as Judge and
and adjudicate thereon.
! The excitement following the read
| ing WIS very great the motion was
overruled; the Funks' attorneys denied
the courts jurisdiction; Funk was
sworn but refused to answer any ques-
tions, on the ground that he might
eliminate himself.
Having disposed of Funk, John
Wessling, of Livingston County,
Funk's agent in Germany, in settling
with his half-sister's heirs, was placed
upon the stand, and stated in sub
stance, as follows, after he had in
dulged in some interesting reminis'
cences of his German tours, and after
Major Widmer had caused him to state
that he had negotiated with the heirs
of Margaret Mohr upon the occasion
of the death of Frank Funk in 1880
The leading questions and answers
were
| ABOUT LIKE THIS:
| Mr.. Widmer-When did you go tC
Germany upon this trip?
Mr.. Wessling-I arrived in ROtter
dam on July 4, 1887.
"When did John Funk and you
| talk the matter Over?"
9Th roo or four daVS before | left"