Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-01-06
VICTORY FOR BETTE
AS ANTICIPATED JUDGE LEAKE's DE-
cisloN IS IN HER FAVOR.
Mr.. Thomas Heirs ut Law Only to Get
$4,000 in Bank-Appeai to BE
Taken.

Mr.. Thomas Heirs st Law Only to Get
$4,000 In Bank-Appeai to Be
Taken.
The Dispasch's prediction that Judge
Leake would decide the celebrated Bette
Thomas-Lewis case IN favor Of the daugh-
ter has been verified.
When the announcement was made q
week ago this morning that the decision
of the Court would be In her favor, it Gre
ated quite q sensation and many questioned
the accuracy of the information.
But the Judgment of the Court has been
entered and the Dispatch was exactly night.
The Japuary term of the Chancery Court
opened yesterday morning at 10 o'clock,
and the fact that the Judge would deliver
his opinion in this noted cause having be-
come an open secret there was q large
crowd in the room, composed chiefly Of
members Of the bar.
As soon as Judge Leake ascended the
| bench he produced the voluminous record
| and counsel for both sides being present,
he announced that he was ready to render
/ his decision. The opinion, which was ac-
J knowledged by all to be an able one, is
quite long, covering seventy-three closely,
written pages. His reading was ilstened
| to with strict attention.
THE CASE AT BAR
The readers of the Dispatch are quite IA
miliar with this case, which has been pend
| ing since January 20. 1889. On that day
Bette Thomas Lewis instituted proceed:
! ings against the curators of the estate OF
w. A. Thomas and others involving claim
set up by her at the time of the death OF
Mr.. Thomas, whose natural child she Is,
and who died on January 4th of that year,
| leaving an estate valued at S25O.0O0, con-
sisting mainly of bonds and mortgages,
together with $1,000, $1,000 on On, deposit p%Sd
woman. whose husband, Lewis, is
| a colored druggist, lived with her father
up TO the time of his death. and was &C
knowledged rs his child and treated as
such. The history of Mr.. Thomas's life
and that of his daughter have both been
published in full in this paper, and the
Dispatch readers have been kept fully ad-
yised as to every stage of the proceedings,
| which have been pending nearly two
years.
before Judge Fitzhugh, who died before
preparing his opinion. Colonel Guy, who
made one of the ablest speeches for the
| heirs at law in the first argument. died o
| few days afterward.
The Opinion.
The Judge read very lengthy opinion,
| dwelling deliberately in the opening upon
a statement of facts in the case which are
already so familiar to our readers that that
portion of the document is omitted.
Exception had been taken by the .coun-
| sci of the heirs at law to the adIAlssion OF
certain statements made by Bette Thomas
Lewis and Fanny Coles to DIR. McGulre and
| Stephen B. Hughes.
These exceptions the Judge Overruled
upon the ground-frst, that they formed q
| part Of the res gestG and were made at the
| time when the lis motd did not exist, and
| when. il the story was fabricated and
| false, every motive of interest would have
prompted the witnesses to have suppress
| ed than to have made the statements.
The Judge also held these statements
fence @ had sought by the evidence of Mr..
| Watkins to impeach the truthfulness OF
! the witness Fanny Coles, and to break
down the claim of the plaintiff by showing
| that Bette Lewis did not tell him lWat-
| kins) ANYTHING of the alleged gift, and held
| that the statements of DIR. McGuire and
| Hughes were competent as ohsetting the
| testimony Of Mr.. Watkins.
THE FACT OF GIFr PROVEN.
Concluding his resume OF the evidence
| the Judge says:
"But even these statements are all ex-
aggerated, Is not the fact Of the gift preven by
the deposition Of Fannie Coles7 and Is not her
evidence worthy OF belief i think IL Ia IL Is
true that there are some strong motives In addi-
ton to those of friendship TO induce Fanny Coles
20 mako the statements Her father was indebt-
ed to Thomas 70 an amount OF nearly reaching
nOfsn t.of ivoA fOr NJ
her friend and companion and doubtoss OK
pected, II this gift should be maintained. TO con-
tinue to be the recipient Of Bett!es bounty, but
because these ara facts, does II therefore follow
that she has committed perjury7 She was sub
tected to O most searching cross-examination Dy
counsel as able as any In the country, but the
defendant has not introduced single witness
| 10 say any statement she made was false. NO
witness has been introduced &c sssail her char
acter or yeracity. II Is tue that Thomas at one
| time, and perhaps as late as october, 1888, did
not intend 10 give Bette all OF his property, and
he intended what he did give should De through
| the intervention OF trustee, but he had failed
10 make a will. DIR. Mcclure gives some very
natural reasons why he did not mako viii, and
says that between October and his death ne did
not change his mind and intended to give all oi
his property to Bette, the only person he seemed
| TO love.
"Upon the whole, am Of tho opinion that the
gift. as alleged by the witness. Fanny coles, 70
| have been made on Friday, January 4, 1883. was
SO made.n
WAS IT A VALID GIFT CAUsA MoRTIsf
The opinion proceeds as follows:
"Gifts OF this character are Of the mos'
| They were introduced into the Common Law
| from the Civil Law. The books abound in dch'
nitiors OF the term donatto mortis cdusa."
The Judge then quoted extracts from
| first BoCvier Law Die, Abbot's Law Dlc.,
page 4O2, Second. Jacobs's Law Die. page
| 307 Pomeroy's Equity, Vol. 3. section LAG,
and Schoulars's Personal Property, Vol. 2
| chapter, IA. as also from the opinion OF
Judge Lewis in Yancey us. Field, Eighty
One Hundred and Seventh U. s., pages Cos
and 61O; Taylor us. Henry. Forty-eighth
Maryland. $50, and Sterling rs. Wilkinson,
Eighth-third Virginia, page 79l.
WAS II A TEsTAMENTARY GIFT?
The Judge next refers to the contention
made by the defendants that the afidayits
Of Bette Lewis and Fanny Coles, nied on
| the original application for the appoint
ment of receiver, contained the terms IN
referring to the property Ito the heirs IN
case of his DEATH" and says in contrasting
| this affidavit with the deposition OF Fanny
| Coles:
ait will be observed that when Fanny Coles
undertakes 70 give In her own language wha'
| Thomas said she never mentions In single In
stance any express condition attached 10 the
/ gift Although she repeats the donors Language
time and again she never says that Thomas gave
| Betty the things saying they were 70 be hers 10
| case OF his death. In every case tho Language
| imported an absolute gift, though the circum
| stances showed unmistakably that gift mortit
/ causa was intended. The afndavit was drawn
| up by lawyer and expressed the legal enect o.
| such Q gift. and the ecross-oxAmination did not
| in my opinion. really call the witnesses attention
| TO the language In question. And do not thinl
| used the qualifying words. But oven II he die
/ use the words in question. cannot believe tia
/ II would produce tho resuly claimed and make
| the gift testamentary In character and void as
/ rift morris causa."