Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1890-10-23

| IL. s. PrOOate Judge.
We CODY above such Of the exhibits as
may be necessary to fully understand
this transaction.
In due time the case came on for trial
in the district court; jury of good and
lawful men was summoned and the evil
dence offered. The verdict of the jury
and the judgment of the court printed
| below speak for themselves. At the
trial the attorneys for Mr.. Willis OBJ
jected to any evidence being considered
| by the jury concerning the fraudulent
| transfer Of the real estate to Mrs Viii
Its on the ground that Mrs. Lincicum's
only remedy was to bring suit to set aside
such conveyance, and that such question
was not triable in the action then pend
| ing. This motion was, very properly,
sustained by the court, and the jury
was instructed that it could only con-
slider the evidence relating to S35 worth
of personal property, and that Mrs.
Lincicum's only remedy on the matter
of the alleged fraudulent transfer of the
forty acres to Mr.. Willis by John F.
Willis as administrator, would be a
suit brought directly to set aside the
deed. It will be seen that on account
of the personal property jury of his
neighbors found verdict in favor Of
his sister for $2298, and 9 judgment
was rendered accordingly. The follow
ing is a true copy Of the judgment:
Anna B. Lincicum, plaintiff,
John +. Willis, No. Z236.
| Terry Critchfield, and
| Albert j. Buck, defendants.
| And now comes the said plaintiff, Anna B.
| Lncicum in her own proper person and by
Messrs Morse & Bennett, her attorneys, and
| come also the defendants, John +. Willis,
Terry Critchfeld and Albert j. Buck, by
MesSrs. Keller & Gephart, their attor neys,
| and all the parties hereto announce them
selves ready for trial. And thereupon comes
| the following jury, to wit: W. E. Conwell,
Trial Bliss, W. ]. K1ingensmith, F. Buckley,
| j. W. Duncan, A. NcKeever, Rizin
Smith, Nell Legler, D. W. CON, Chas. Wood,
| Levi Clark and Z. Bondeld, twelve good
| of Jefferson, who, being duly cautioned and
examined, are In open court solemnly
sworn well and truly to try the issues here
Ing S TO the law and the evidence. And the
jury, having heard the evidence adduced
| and the arguments or counsel therein, and
being fully advised In the premises are In
ing the case, and retire to their room un-
| der charge Of their sworn bailin to conSid-
| er their verdict.
/ ton, return now here into court, under
charge Of their bailif1 as Aforesaid, and de-
/ liver to the court CnelT verdict In WTlLlQS
and figures as follows, towtt:
"Anna B. Lincicum
John F. willis ct al.
We the jury find for the plaintiff and as
| sess her damages at s22 .9S.
w. j. KLINGENsMITH. Foreman"
And thereupon and upon said verdict it is
| considered ordered and adJudged by the
B. Lincicum, have and recover Of and from
the said defendants, John +. Willis, Terry
Critchfield and Albert j. Buck, the sum OF
| ($22. 98) twenty two dollars and ninety eight
cents, her damages as aforesaid assessed,
| together with the costs OF this action, taxed
at D, and hereof let execution issue.
After the rendition of this judgment,
Mr.. J. II. Bennett, as one of the attor-
neys for Mrs. Lincicum, instituted suit
in the district court to recover the forty
acres. But John F. Willis had been In
court on that transaction; he had heard
the verdict of one jury as to the personal
property, and his plans were frustrated.
Before jury of his neighbors such IN
blushing conduct towards q sister could
not stand No way was left him but TO
digorge the ill-gotten money that the
unaatural brother had taken from his
! widowed sister. The matter was there
fore compromised before the suit came
on trial by John r. Willis paying some
hundreds of dollars and the costs Of the
suit. He had pretended 10 sell the forty
acres to his wife for $500, when 1t was
| worth at least $400, but justice came at
last, and the inhumsn brother is forced
to restore to his sister that which ia her
due.
The afidavis Of Mr.. ]. Il. Bennett Of
Holton, Kan, b here copied:
| STATE OF KANSAS,
JACKSON COUNTY.
Twas one OF the attorneys for the plaintiff
in an action brought IN the district court OF
Jefferson county, Kansas, about the year
1880, by Anna B. Lincicum against her
brother, John z. Willis, as administrator
of her fathers estate, and his sureties.
Mrs. Lincicum averring fraud In her
| brothers final settlement Of the estate.
Twas present at the trial, and we proved
to the satisfaction OF the jury and obtained
First-That the Said John T. Willis, on
the Sd day OF January, 1879, by falsehood
and misrepresentation obtain an allowance
county OF the sum Of 500 against the
said estate, for care and attention to
the property Of his father for a year
before he died, and for care and at
tention durinn his fathers last sickness.
Second-That the said John r. Willis, at
! the nnal settlement OF the said estate 3D.
tanned an allowance TO himself OF the sum
OF IS, as fees OF appraisers OF real estate,
when in truth he never paid such fees nor
| were they ever claimed.
Thlrd-That q crop Of wheat standing on
! the land Of the deceased at the time OF his
death was never accounted for, by or in
| said administration, and was worth 500;
that the said John +. Willis, at the fnal
| settlement OF the said estate, obtained an
allowance to himself OF the sum Of $40 for
money which he claimed to have paid out
! for physicians fees for attendance upon
his father during his last sickness, when in
truth and in fact he had only paid about the
sum OF $3.50.
Fourth-That the said John F. Willis, by
falsehood and threats, drove away from
public sale OF the forty acres Of land made
| by the administrator, one Charles Larson,
who was wishing to bid on said land q
higher price than II was sold for.
Fifth-The said land was bid on by the
said John +. Willis in the name CT and for
his wife, without her knowledge and with
out her solicitation, and without the pay
ment of any money whatever.
Sixth-That the said John f. Willis, upon
the return OF the sale of said land, made
aff1davit that he did not directly or in
| directly purchase said land or any interest
therein.
After the evidence was completed, the
point was made by the attorneys for
John +. Willis that the plaintiff could
not recover in that kind Of an action on
account Of any fraudulent conduct OF
the administration in the sale and pur-
chase Of the real estate mentioned in
items 4, and 6, as mentioned above,
for the reason that her remedy was to
institute suit to set aside the frsudu
lent conveyance Of the land by John F.
Willis to his wife, and thereby recover
the land. These items were not, there
fore, considered by the jury in making
up the amount Of their verdict.
AS one Of the attorneys for Mrs. Linci-
cum, after judgment had been rendered