The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1893-04-12
DR.. RYER'S WILL.
Did He Say Christopher
Was His Son?
Some Startling Testimony-An Old
Time Friend of the Late Doctor
Relates Conversation.

Nothing is so proverblally uncertain as a
big will case, but just at present 1t looks as
IL Chris opher Ryer will be winner in his
suit for a portion of the S1.500.0O0 left by
his alleged father. the late DR.. Washin gton
NJ. Ryer.
The testimony of o. j. Matthews, pio-
neer who knew the deceased in the early
days of California, did much to help the
plaintiffs case.
Mr.. Matthews, in Judge Levy's court yes
terday. told of his acquaintanceship with
the doctor in the early SOS. when he resided
in Stockton The doctor and young Chris
were often seen on the streets together and
were as father and son. The doctor was re-
garded as a single man in the strict accept
ance of the term, but his relations with the
young Spanish lady, the mother of Chris
topher, were public property.
In the year of 1875 young Christopher
came to Mr.. Matthews and solicited his in
fuence in an attempt he was about to make
10 have his supposed father set him up in
business. The witness wrote to the doctor
urging that the reasonable request be COM
piled with. \ o ans wer was received, but a
few days later the two met and had a
lengthy conversation on the subject. Dr.
Ryer refused to advance any money on the
ground that the young man would not know
how to use 1t. Mr.. Matthews asked if the
young man was HOT OF IN6 ueCtOi own
flesh and blood. ana was answered frankly
in the Affirmative The witness was posi-
tive that DIR. Ryer had always acknowledged
The paternity of the boy during his lifetime.
He had never met the boys mother, but
remembered her being spoken of as Mrs.
Ryer.
Attorney G. r. B. Hayes was loud In his
objections to the admission of this testi-
mony. and based his opposition on every
known and many unknown legal techni all
ties. The continued objections led Judge
Levy TO keep the words Same ruling" on
his tongues end. The attorney finally re-
duced his voluminous objections to the
mere explanation. Same objection"
The entire days proceedings were highly
pleasing to Attorneys Budd and Campbell.
In the morning they carried their point
that all the private papers and corresp ond-
ence of the deceased must be produced in
court.
There was regular fusillade of objec-
tionS when the demand was first made by
the plaintiffs attorneys. The proposition
was denounced as moral outrage by A.
tOrneys Hayes and Spencer. and the idea
OF OYerhaulng a dead mans private papers
was declared to be nothing short of a crime.
Tie court, however. sustained the de-
mand. and Marshall Is. RIVER, nephew of
the deceased and an executor of the vii
uader which the estate is now administered,
was instructed to surrender the papers, it
being known that they were In his posses
sion.
Among the letters produced were two
which had passed between DR.. Ryer and his
alleged son.
Attorney Hayes was a very mad man ever
Sis forced compliance with the demand OF
his opponents. There was quite bundle
of the papers produced, and the court took
them in charge pending personal perusal.
It was understood that a will made many
years ago will be traced up An inspection
OF the papers was refused 10 all but those
directly interested in the case, but it was
said that the bulk of them were uninterest-
ing and had no bearing upon the case.
During the progress of the days proceed
ings the courtroom was crowded. and con-
spicuous among the interested hearers were
number of pioneer friends of the late DR..
Ryer.
When the case closed for the day the
plaintiff attorneys were in a very happy
mood. The testimony taken during the
day was regarded as favorable to their
client.
The sum of s1,5oO,OOO will admit many
slices, and at presentit looks as though an
unlooked-for one will be taken off by Chris
topher Ryer.
The other side. however, Is expected to
have some surprises in store.