Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1891-04-16
STEVENSON WILL DECISIO n.

Judge Rising in the stevenson
will case. 1t admits the will to
probate and gives the case to the
widow.
The history of the case is briefly
as follows:
Some years ago @. Q. Stevenson
lived in Gold Hill and was con-
sidered worth a, great deal of
money. He was married and had
two sons. His relations with his
family were pleasant until he met
Mrs. Frame whose husband was
in his employ. Becoming infatu-
ated with Mrs. Frame he attempt
ed surreptitiously to obtain a di-
vorce from his wife, whom he had
previously sent to Michigan with
a promise of soon joining her
She became appraised of his act
and came at once to Gold Hill,
and obtained a divorce from him.
About this time Mrs. Frame OBJ
tanned a divorce from her hus-
band and married @. G. Stevenson.
The willingness CT the wife to
allow separation, was due to the
receipt of an anonymous letter,
warning her that her husband
was VIGOROUSLY untrue to her and
that he was unworthy of her.
This anonymous letter was pro-
duced in the trial of the case, and
the proponant, Mrs. Stevenson, adj
mitted it to be her hand writing.
Her explanation of this letter the
Court stated from the bench he
did not consider true. This let
ter was the entering wedge
which broke up the Stevenson
family, separated husband and
wife, and cut the children and
grandchildren off with a sum
equaled to one one hundred
forty-fourth of the estate, as valu-
ed at the time Of making the will.
In other words out of every one
hundred and-forty- five dollars, the
flesh and blood Of C. G. Stevenson
got one dollar, and the woman
who had come into the family af-
ter the wealth was acquired got
the balance, manifestly an unequal
division. The contestants held
that two years after the will was
made, G. G. Stevenson repenting
of his act made a codicil. His |
two brothers testified that he told |
them that he did SO, and it was
in evidence that on his dying bed |
almost with his last breath he |
told his son Ed that he made a
will three years before (the first |
will was made five years before)
and that he must be there when |
it was opened.
Now he was not allowed to be
there when the will was opened.
Mrs. Stevenson opened it aud af-
ter the seal was broken she threw
something in the stove. The con-
testants claimed that this docu-
ment, SO suddenly committed to
the flames, was the codicil. She
claimed that it was her own will
by Lowe and Ravens,
of San Francisco. Lowe
and Ravens under oath, denied
having witnessed it. Had she al
owed the other benefciaries of
he will to have seen the paper
opened, it would have saved a
great deal of trouble. In some
States a will must be absolutely
above suspicion to be admitted t.
probate.
The law does not so require in
Nevada.
One of the features of this case
S deserving of special notice.
There was an attorney in San
who was ready to testi-
y under oath that Stevenson
,alue to his office in 1889, and
here wrote what he stated was
IN addition to his will'' in which
lie said that he had cancelled a
mortgage" and provided for his
.wo boys" Trenmor Coffin the
called at the house of
! man in the night and threatened
20 make certain scandalous ex-
0osures il he did not keep his
friend, the witness, off the stand.
The witness for this reason re-
used to testify. Coffin after
denying that he had called in the
light on the party specified, was
inally forced by the witness to