The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1891-09-24
The Searles Win tyontast

SALEM, Mass, Sept. 23.-The second day
OF the Searles' will case opened with a big
crowd present. The examination of Mr..
Searles was continued. Witness and his
wife went to Europe November %, 1857 on
wedding tour. Previous to starting on
the wedding tour, Mrs. Searles secured
funds, about 100000. The trip was for six
months and included witness, his wife. a
lady's maid and Rev. DIR. Clapp, his wife
and daughter. He did not meet DR.. Slade
or any spiritualists on that trip: knew
Charles Bolles, who he believed called him
self harmony scholar, or Christian sci
enlist; but he never knew of his attending
Mrs. Searles either before or after his
marriage. Timothy Hopkins managed
Mrs. Searles' affairs up to the time of the
partnership.
After his marriage, while in Europe.
witness wife made over to him certain
deeds at Nice. The suggestion of CO.
partnership came from Mrs. Searles. Arti-
cies OF co -partnership were put in evidence.
Mary F. Searles, Edward F. Searles.
Thomas E. Stiilman and Thomas Hubbard
were appointed to manage all the
property OF Searles and to pay the in
come to the parties, Mr. and Mrs.
Searles to receive IS per cent. each and
Stillman & Hubbard each per cent. of the
income, if it did not amount to $55o, 200, to
be brought up to that amount by the sale of
securities. Mrs Hopkins became &C
qualnted with Stillman & Hubbard about a
year before her marriage and on October 81.
1857, Sullman was given a power of at
torney from MIR. Searles and Mrs. Hopkins.
There was also general power of attorney
from Mrs. Hopkins to Stillman & Hubbard.
dated November s, 1857. This was the
same date as the marriage with
a supplementary certifcation after
marriage. This was never revoked
to the knowledge of witness. Witness
knew OF the transfer of stock standing in
her name to the firm few days before her
death. Witness saw her attorneys in New
York five days before and told them her
condition was critical. He did not learn
that the transfer had been made until after
her death. He could not say what the
stocks were, or their value, and did not
know how and never knew what the assets
OF the o-partnership were; never heard
the amount stated. Witness share of the
income from the firm was IS per cent, but
he drew both his and his wife's income.
and at her request used the money to pay
general household expenses. Witness de-
posted the money to his individual account
and drew checks against it. Burleigh called
for the check-book. Witness continued /:
Mrs. Searles had no individual book ac-
count during the time they lived together.
He could not give the average annual prof
its of the co-partnership, but it was be-
tween 100000 and $780, 00
At the afternoon session another power
of attorney was put in evidence dated july
ID, 1883, from Mary o. Searles to Thomas
f. Stillman and Thomas Hubbard. This
was general power of attorney and con-
tanned a declaration that as il
was coupled with an interest
thereon it was irrevocable. A trans
fer was put in dated June IS, 1855
from Mary f. Searles to Thomas f.. Still
man of various railroad stocks and a note
of the Pacific Investment company for
81, SOC, 900 and 20, $50 shares of Central Pa
cihc railroad stock, the aggregate
amounting to $4,000, 00O and this
Stillman in turn transferred to F. E.
Searles, and he in turn transferred
at together with /, 400 shares of Washing
ton Building association stock, $40, 1000 in
scrip of the company and 900 sh ares Of
United States bank stock which he had re-
ceived from his wife in trust, to the Arm
of Scar. es, Stillman g. Hubbard. Obiec
ton was made to question to MIR. Searles
"What did your private estate consist OF
at the time of your marriageP' An ad.
journment was made to tomorrow morn
ing.