Grand Rapids herald. [volume] (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 1892-1959, 1892-02-27
HEDARED NOTTAIg
Latest Evidence in the e-7
Viii Contest.
MRS. HAYDEN ON The sTsss
Further Proof Of tie Oh Mans ,--z-
pseify and Azrgzrssta's Each<
uons to Gam Her Ercs-

the contestants, IA the Jas. II. Brown
viii case yesterday. A the trial pro-
eeeds Mrs. Haines becomes more neE-
vous and ndgsty. she apparently cza-
DOT remain IA any tlxed posltiop, and
nss iost the rigldity which character
ized heE during the opening days.
Mrs. Hayden resumed the ss--a.
Soon after she visited her father n
1883 he took der riding aud during the
trip said that Margares had informed
him that she (Ahce) had told her
sMAr9aresl that sne was not ms child
and that be ned been intimate with
her two aunts. Alice denied this. In
1888 Alice sent Margaret Christmas
gift. but il WAS returned without an ex-
pianxtion. In 1855 when Alice came
home again she met Margaret In the
yard, and kissed her and shook hands,
hut she did not return the embraces. A
few moments later Mr.. Brown asked
Margaret 20 come into the house, ~
people we're talking about her staying
ortside. She replied; do you think
I would come iuto such house as you
kcep@ Her next advent here was IN
1857 when her mother died. She tired
20 speak to her father alone, hut he
said he could not do 90. a. he hal pro-
missed Margaret that no would not. and
he would not do anything to incur hor
displessure for = 81 900. No estrang-
ing circumstances occurred between
1850 and 1883. Prior TO that time her
father said he never intended To make
. will. ~ the law was good enough for
him. Margaret never liked the WIT
ness and hated her as baby.
Mr.. Russell began q searching cross
examination, the first part of which
was q reiteration Of Mrs. Hayden's
direct testimony. She was not aware
of the fact that her father kept an ac-
count OF the money advanced her hus-
band until her return after his death
and could give no figures as to how the
account stood. Before gong TO Denver
Mr.. Hayden acted as her fathers book
Keeper, and was once instructed to
mark OF au account against HIM as
paid. At this point Mr.. Russell pro-
duced the old mans account book and
requested the witness to check the
tens which were in her husbands
Haines and her attorneys went into
4
entry in the book. dated 1877, showed
an account against Mr.. Hayden OF
N14.50. the expense OF the funeral OF
bis daughter Maud. This was not
crossed of. She was not aware that
he rent OF the house to the amount of
400 WAS charged against her. As che
aad done once before Mrs. Hayden
acknowledged that she had worked up
ier own care.
Afternoon session.
In the afternoon Mr.. Russell con-
hnued the examination of Mrs. Hay
len and questioned her regarding her
knowledge of the will left by her
jather. She said that Mr.. Ransom, one
II the executors. read the will to her
,hortly after her fathers death. She
bad observed the clause bequeathing
70 her husband all of the debts which
ne owed her father. and felt sure that
Ger husband did not owe her father.
Al VARIOUS tinnes her husband had paid
her father sums OF money and had not
ven given credit for them. Once her
fathers attention was called TO this
fact and he scratched out some OF the
sccounts, saying that he had forgotten
lbout them.
William o. Brown, nephew OF James
Fl. Brown, said that he had been res
ldeut of Grand Rapids ten years and
bad worked for his uncle before his
beath. He Was induced to come to
lnis city from his home in jefferson
county. New York. by his uncle who
wrote 70 Ms brother. The letters we're
fIctated to John Cramer and the old
man signed them. One of them he
Di9red twice. One Was dated March
~, 1851, and the other March %, 1881.
Mr.. Russell objected To the INTRODUCE
ZION of the letters IN evidence, because
apparently they were answers to other
letters and not ineligible without the
letters in response-to which they were
written. Mr.. Smiley said that il the
letters referred to were IN existence
hey were IN the possession Of the adj
Illustrator of the Brown estate and
puld be secured.
He signed 10 Twice.
The nrst one was directed 10 Frank
y. Brown. WATERFOWL, New York, and
Fas . request that he allow his brother.
Will. 70 come to this city and help Mr..
Brown In the management OF his bust
aess. The second letter was in response
10 reply 10 the first and instructed
frank p. Brown TO send his brother
here. pay his fare aud draw on Mr..
Brown Tor the expense. The last Was
ngned twice. The witness lived with
BIS uncle until h's death, and went oc-
cxsionaliy with hin, 10 GrandvilIe when
re visited Mrs. Haines. While Mr..
brown WAS at the heme OF Mrs. Hainss.
&C various times, the latter would klss
ard hug her father and 81 on his lap.
Once while ~ GrsndvisIc, IN the pres
tnce Of Mr.. Brown. Mrs. Hainss told
the witness that Mrs. Hayden was ex-
trsvsesnt IN her dress. went to parties
and balls. spent oil the money her hus-
band made end was . filrs. Mrs.
Hnines also said that Alice was
not bic daughter, that she did
uos look like him. did not act like him.
md looked moss like DR.. Hoyt Of
Adrian. Mr. Brown replied. ~ wish !
had known what you have told me be-
fsre. Margaret, I should have left
'Posev' years ago." Mr.. Brown fire.
,usnily called bic wife sPos>y." Mrs.
Hsines said that her mother was not
respectable. because che had aiysn
birth 70 "a iliegItsmsts child. MIRA
srevn zee eck. very SICK oncerebut
ara. uaineo nd that she Vas MY
sputtIne 10 CO." Mr.. Brown eo,ncidsd
with HE daughter IN this. In 1879. Mr..
Brown purchased = eoock Of dry Roods.
Mra Hayden VISITED Grand Rapids IN
1919, aad abe came sgstn when her
mother d,ed. The witness heard Mrs
Hsiuee cell her fathee thai ALICE had
Md - her that che wished he wAs
1sed- This made Ne Old man hop.
psa ed" Mra Brown often axksd
ssv husbaad fes neoey With which a.
ny dresses an1 10 give 60 the
shursb. but her hushand refused
AfleY Nra HfoNn,a danth Airs 50