The morning call., 1893-08-24
THERE IS NO WILL.
Fred B. Chester's Petition
Is Denied.
THE WIDOW GETS HER SHARE
Judge Levy Decides That j. F. Tur-
ner and Lizzie O'DonneII, His
Clerk, Were Mistaken.

Jud ge Levy delivered his long expected
opinion yesterday in the matter of the
petition of Frederick B. Chester to have
admitted to probate the alleged lost will
of his deceased father, Edwin S. Chester.
E. S. Chester died a little over two
years ago. and no viii was ever found.
Letters of administration were granted to
| A. Everett Ball. and the estate, valued al
somewhere near 100000. has been ad-
ministered by him up 10 the present date.
A short while ago Frederick Chester came
forward with a story of will which he
could prove that his father made, and
which he maintained had been lost or
stolen.
dis chief witnesses were ]. F. Turner
and his clerk, Miss Lizzie O'DOnnell. who
swore that they saw the will in Chester's
tin box on the day of his death, and if this
statement was true the decision would
have to go to the petitioner. as A. L. Boil
ton, the attorney, proved the execution of
a will some months previous TO ChesteTs s
death, and Tecited its contents. Chester
was helpless invalid for some months
before his death. but his widow testified
that he spoke of this will and said that he
/ had destroyed it.
Judge Levy, in delivering his decision
yesterday, admitted that it was clearly
shown that a Will executed by Chester
once existed, and he stated that 'One
Turner and a lady named O'DoDnell"
sWore to having seen II. on the day of
! Chester'S death, in box in Chester :
ctiice. But it was very remarkable that
two years ago letters ot administration
were granted to Ball, and it was not until
two years after that that Chester brought
forward these witnesses to prove the eX-
iStence of will.
The fact Is.v said the Judge" cit was
not until Il was found that Turner had
some notes III this desk on which he owed
money and which had disappeared that
this story Of the lost will cropped up. And
1t was not until Turner had heen sued for
the amount some S24.000-"due on these
notes that he came forward aud gave this
testimony, together with an almost veTba-
Tim report OF the contents Of the will.
The testimony is entirely Inconsistent
with the facts and ciTcum stances sur
rounding the ease, and | must conclude
that both Turner ard Miss O'Donneu
were entirely mistaken
\ The Judge went on 10 describe how that
Chester, Y no was married three times,
left two children. one Dy first wife, an
other by an eX-wife, and a widow who
had cared for him almost as an nurse for
ten long years, Chester having come to
the coast broken down Invalid. Under
his 'pretendPd" will the widow who had
cared for him so long was only 10 receive
Sl25 a month, while the residue Of the
estate was TO g 10 the son, the daughter
being left entirely In he cold. Such will
would be very unjust
Against the testimony of Turner and
Miss ODonnell was that of the widow, now
Mrs. Roberts, who testified that Chester,
In 1T OF rem9rse, told her of this uujust
Will, and added that he had destroyed il.
Every search Was made Immediately after
tile death OF Chester. but no Will was
found; and in such cases the presumption
always teken was either that no will
existed. or that. if there was one 1t had
been destroyed by the deceased himself.
In conclusion Judge Levy said: in
cases OF this kind where lest will is
Sonsht 10 b. established great care and
judgment must be exercised by the court
IN accepting testimony. and here | find
that the evidence is neither clear nor posi-
tive. judgment. therefore. will be entered
against the petitioner"
So the estate will be administered by
Ball as before ard distributed between the
widow. son and daughter in equal shares,
there being no community pr0pprIy.