The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-06-19

| give, with ell due and lesai soieni'Ios.
the larger portion-not aii-,of DIS properly ~
his only child aud darling dsugnl 1;,hcvt sbe e
| slghest evidence 70 warrant the reduction,
| anf In disreeard Of full, incontroyertiole
proof 10 the contrary that u was william A;
| Thomas dying design 70 leave his beloved
only, child in destitution ana aiSA ~ tbs
statute Of distributions his whole es-
tsse unon collateral kindred. with
whom be had no intercourse, and
for whom he cared pothing-strangers aoso-
| lutely TO his heart and home, And the only
indncement urged for this illogical and un-
that Dir. Thomas had the portrait Of b. r;
| Grayely. who had married MIR. Thomas
| constr and that in a letter OF coincidence,
dated March 2. 1882. in reply 70 letter an
! nouncing the death Of b. +. Gravely, no ex-
pressed kindly regard and asked Mr. Grave,
| I've son can do anything for the family r
fhe inference is that be did then give
| them aid. and to this be doubtless
/ had reference when he declared as
| detailed in the evidence of Stephen Is
! Hughes. Fannie Coles. Mrs. Boyd and sundry
others that he had given TO them long years az
| ago all he intended ever TO give TO tnem We
| have given this unavodsbly long narrative OF
/ the relations, circumstances, congenitles anu
/ sltuatOn OF the parties to this cause 10 SNOW
! that the ayowed and constant OBJECT OF Mf
| Thomas life. labor and love was sollcituds
and provision for his daughter bet.e, hpo
that there is not one scintilla OF PROOF ia We
record that through all the years Oh MS me
and in all the references be ever made 70 MS
intended disposition of his property ne ever
had IA his heart or mind purpose u PROVIDE
particularly for any other than his cherisneu
child; 70 whom be was bound by the strongest
ties Of nature and Affection 10 wnon ne owen
the undivided obligation of father. ano
whose whole tenor of life. SIS shown by the
record in this case, from her birth 10 the
moment of his death. was an IN
varying demonstration OF dutitul oevotion
and filial scon6dence and affection. During
the long years of his declining neaitn ana
cold Rradations of decay" there was no
planning or plotting after property IN her
heavy heart: but reposing in childllke conf
dence aud disinterested trust In the love Oh
her father. DR.. Mcclure says that when re-
peatedly warned and advised by him as often
be had urged upon her father on all the occa;
sjons OF his critical iliness) that If he should
die without will tho law would deprive her
of everything, she always seemed rather IN
different about IL, and was always more con-
cerned about his health than his money"
On Thursday, the Sd day Of January, 1883,
William A. Thomas was taken seriously III,
and he died in the early part Of the night OF
Illness that he made to his daughter Bette
the gift which is the subject of controversy
I'm this case, and to which the Chanoery Court
of the city Of Richmond. upon the evidence
adduced, has solemnly adjudged she is enti-
tied by law.
1t is vehemently charged that the testi-
mony OF Fannie Coles as 10 the factum OF the
gift Is false-that 1t Is the result OF conspi-
racy with Bette Lewis TO defraud the legal
distributes of William A. Thomas; that no
such gift as che testifes to, was ever made.
The charge IS easily asserted, but law. logic
and q decent respect for human nature, all
require clear and indubitable proof to induce
judicial credence 10 such an atrocty.
II is argued that Mr.. Thomas did not make
the gift months causs OF his property TO his
child Bette. as distinctly and incontrovert-
ably proved. because of his Oft and emphatic
statement of intention to provide for her by
will; and time and time again 1t Ia argued
that in the eight or ten minutes OF Mr.. CHI
hams presence with him alone in the death
chamber, only brief time on Friday after
noon before no expired be made an appoint
ment with Mr.. Gillian 10 golto Mr.. Gilllams
Office the next day TO have his will written.
Aside from the utter improbability-n to say
jmpossibility-of an enfeebled and dying old
man. in the country beyond the limits OF the
city of Richmond. making an engagement at
4 O'Clock Z. NJ to arise from what proved TO
be his death-bed early that night and TO come
into the city and to lawyers Office the next
day. there 10 no evidence Ia the record OF any
Sucu purpose or ppahluHlty.
After long review Of the evidence and facts
bearing upon the case OF which the above are
extracts, Judge Fauntleroy said; In the able
and elaborate opinion of Judge Leake, filed
with the record in this onse, be decided, say
ing. But certainly not without doubts
The question TO my mind lis a very doubtful
one:n that the gift by Mr.. Thomas OF bis
bank book showing the amount Of his de-
posts in the Planters National Bank was IN
effectual in law. as donatio motifs causa OF
the money 10 his credit in the said bank, and
he decreed accordingly.
In this am of the opinion, the decree un-
der review is erroneous, and that it should
be, under the rule. in this particular cor
rected in favor of the appellees. and in all
other respects affirmed. but the majority of
the court think the decree is wholly right. and
that it must be affirmed as 1t 10. IL
The last clause is invested wth1partcular
interest. because it was changed from the
original and resulted in the loss to Bette
Thomas-Lewis of $4,000 represented in the
bank book. Ii is plain from the manuscript
that the words, as originally written, were
changed.
They at first read I'm this am of opin-
ion the decree under review IS erroneous. and
ought TO be, under the rule in this particular
corrected in favor of the appellees and IN all
other respects confirmed"
The change can be readily seen. ard was
evidently made after Judge Feuntleroy found
that the majority of the court disagreed with
him in this portion of the opinion.
Ia continuance the Judge proceeded then
with the discussion of the law of the case
and determined each OF the legal questions
raised in the case in favor of the appellee
Bette Lewis. and 10 support of each position
gave a long and interesting review of the
authorities on the subject.