Waterbury evening Democrat., 1891-10-30
| WHICH WAS MEANT /?
The Middle Over the Monog.
han Will Case. -.
Two CLAIMANTS TO A FORTUNE.
Half Brothers Bearin~ the Samo Nams
Making a Z ster Fight

The obscure WIFI of Thomas Monaghan
The Surrogate Holds that What Is Writ
ter, Not What Is Meant, Determ ines to
Whom the Property Shall Gothic
Rightful Heir Likely to Lose the Suit.
| NEW YORK, Oct. 3o.-The Monaghan
will case, which has been hearing in
the Surrogate's Court the past few days,
has demonstrated that what man
means cannot affect what he puts in
Writing.
Did Thomas Monaghan was a house
painter who quit painting houses in
1871 and commenced to dabble in real
estate. So successful was he that when
hel died in September, last year, he left
property valued at $500, 1000.
Long years ago the painter was mar
risd, but ne separated from his wife,
Annie McEvoy Monaghan, in 1864. Of
the three sons she bore him only one has
survived-Thomas Monaghan, jr, a
blonde, about 80 years of age. He has
not seen or heard of his father for man y
years having lived on farm in Iowa.
After separating from his first wife
Monaghan married again, although for
humber of years before Annie McEvoy
died he lived with the present Mrs.
Mduoghan. There is a grave question,
even among his lawyers, whether the
| Oldest son by the second marriage is
legitimate.
On the day before the old painter died
he made will dividing his property
almost equally between his "beloved
daughter, Rose Monaghan, now living
with me-" and his "beloved son, Thos.
Monaghan. Jr."
This latter was the oldest son of the
second Mrs. Monaghan. He is a fine
looking young fellow with brown mus
taohe and dashing air. Unlike his half
brother, he is dark. He was prepared to
enter into the enjoyment Of the property
left to him, when the elder young
Monaghan put in an appearance and OBJ
jected. He claimed to be the ''beloved
son, Thomas Monaghan Jr.," and said
! that his half brother had no right to the
name, and consequently not to the es-
tate. -~4
Surrogate Ransom practically decided
in the blondes favor yesterday. "There
seems to be no doubt from the evil
dence," he says, ''that the prepayment
Second young Monoghan) was the party
meant by his father to receive the bene-
| fit of his estate. But, unfortunately for
| him, he failed so to state. In case
| like this we must go by what the will
states, not by what the testator IS
thought to have meant. The objector
is the legitimate son of Thomas Monog-
han, is known as Thomas Monaghan.
| jr., and seems to have a right to the
name. The prepayment has no such
right 81
Lawyer Thaddeus B. Wakeman there
upon arose and asked for an adjourn
ment. ''This view of the case is q com
plete surprise to u.s. was his first re-
mark. 1--WE have diligently searched
| the records of the Catholic churches
hoping to prove that the objector is not
entitled to his name, but is really known
as William Monaghan. We ask for a
| little more time"
An entertaining discussion among
counsel ensued over this proposition,
which Surrogate Ransom finally settled
by adjourning the hearing until We'd
nesday Of next week. In return for
this privilege, however, he ordered, that
the prepayment pay the fees of the OBJ
| jector's witnesses and his hotel ex-
penses as we'll. The Surrogate also
added sarcastically that the SURPRISE of
the counsel at his view of the case was
not so much a surprise of the facts as a
surprise of the law.
Had the old painter simply added the
| words CHOW living with me,' after his
| sons name, as he did after his daughters,
the present litigation could not have
| been possible. AS it is now, all the in
| dications are that Thomas Monaghan
ST., instead of providing for the wants
of the son, whom he loved with all the
warmth of q fathers affection, has
simply enriched the child whom he cast
| off many years ago.