The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1893-01-24
With All Attempts az Compromise End
ed, the Trial Began Yesterday.
Judge Stevenson. Of the Hamilton County Cir
cut Court, Whittier the Case Went on
Venue, Is Presiding at the Hearing.
After Arguing TO Expuuge Paragraph
Dir. CrOpsey Opens for His Side.
He Tells Why He Relieves the VIII Probated
sFOrgery-His References to MIS- McDOn-
ald-Sharp Passage Between Lawyers.


called before Judge Robert II. Stevenson of
the Hamilton Circuit Court, at Noblesviile.
yesterday morning. Attorneys and repre-
rentatives of the press left for the scene OF
the conflict on the o'clock train, arriving
at Noblesville at o'clock. But few of
the witnesses were in the party. Mrs.
Mcdonald. the defendant, and the
central and most interesting figure In the
contest was not present at the trial yester-
day on account of an attack of t0nsllitis.
but her attorneys stated that she would be
In attendance to-day. Malcolm Mcdonald.
son of the testator and the principal plant
iff, showed mp at the Union Station
ten minutes before train time and
was instantly In conference with his at
torneys. The only witnesses in addition to
Mr.. Mcdonald. who left by the early train.
were the experts, Henry s. Tolman and
Mr.. Euell. of Chicago, both for the plaintiff.
and the latter the author OF "Euell. on
Fixtures" law publication of considera-
bic Importance.
The case was called OF 9 o'clock. Both
sides were ready for trial. and there was
neither motion nor suggestion look
ing to- to- continuance B 10th sides
fortified behind an imposing array Of legal
talent OF wide experience, eloquent and
logical In argument. of keen perception
and discrimination. and quick to seize
every point and press it to the advantage of
their clients.
For the plaintiffs there are Ferdinand
Winter and James Cropsey, OF lndianapo-
lis. and Kane u Kane of Noblesville. while
Mrs. Mcdonald has intrusted her interests
TO Addison C. Harris. w. p. Fishback and
w. p. Kappes. of Indianapolis and Shirts q
'Kilborn. of NoblesviIle. The executor of
the estate, Theodore p. Haughey. who is
supposed to occupy an independent posi-
ton. is resented by Albert ]. Beveridge.
The first step. the case being called. was
the fling of motion by the attorneys for
the plaintiff To make part OF the record the
Transcript of the examination Of Mrs. Nc
Donald conducted last june In this city.
The motion was granted. and the defense
asked and were given all exception.
The answer OF the executor. which was
denial of each and every material allega-
tioD, was filed, and the litIgants were ready
TO select jury. The selection of the
twelve jurymen was easily ACCOMPLISHED.
But two jurors were challenged, and those
peremptorily. One had had q will case
tho wsr and the defense released him. The
other challenge was by plaintiffs attor-
neys on general principles. The questions
put developed that the jurors knew abso-
1utely nothing of the case. which was the
one essential. Other questions developed
that none Of the jurors had any prejndlce
against q man disposing of his property by
Will or that there had been no
will complications in their fami-
according TO the law and the evidence.
The meh who will weigh the evidence and
declare whether the alleged will was exc
cuted by Senator Mcdonald or by some of
his interested relatives are j. R White,
William Harrison, Washington Tid!er,
Asher Tomlinson, j. i. Mcdonnell. I. j.
Shoemaker. John Eiler. Byron Hanghey,
Herman Roauet. John lice. Oliver Elliott
and J. N. Pickett.
All are farmers and apparently men of
fair average intelligence. The jury was
then temporarily dismissed. while counsel
wore heard In argument on proposition
that has an important bearing on the
case. This was upon the motion
TO strike from the dispositions of James
Mcdonald. brother OF the testator. and
John NJ. Butler. his law partner. those Sec
lions which refer to statements made to
them by Senator Mcdonald relative
to the disposition of his property
subsequent to the execution of his will.
The statement in the deposition of James
Mcdonald. that Is Objectionable, recites
conversation with the Iestator in which he
said that his will provided for the
sale of the Washington street prop
erty with several lots on Blake street
and Virginia avenue, two-thirds of the
proceeds OF which WAS TO 60 To his son
Malcolm and one-thrd TO be divided be-
tween his grandc hllGren Jessie and Joseph.
This alleged conversation IS fixed 1T five or
Six days subsequent TO the execution OF the
will.
LII was agreed that this kind of evidence
would be admissible IL "a will were lost,
and was clearly improper if tie genuine
ness OF Will were uDQuestiOned. The Will
being not lost but it's genuineDess ques-
tioned, left the question open. The subject
Was argued at great length, and host OF
authorities were cited TO sustain the posi-
ton of both sides. Judge Stevenson took
the matter under Amusement. and pending
his ruling James CroDsey made the opening
statement To the Jury of the things the
plaintiffs expected TO prove.
Mr.. Cropsey SAID this action was brought
under special statute which gave to any
person having an interest In an estate the
night to contest will. MIR. Cropsey said
that In addition 10 his widow Josephine,
Senator Mcdonald. OF his death, left other
heirs at law. so-wlt. Malcolm S.
Mcdonald and his grandchildren,
Miss jessie and Joseph +. Mcdonald. jr..
the children of the Senator's deceased son
Ezekiel. The other plaintiff. Malcolm g.
Mcdonald. was the son of Malcolm g.. and
was Interested through the claim of his
father. +. p. Haughey. &c was stated was
only q nominal defendant, and Is dlsiu-
terested. The alleged will was here read,
and Mr.. Cropsey stated that the theory OF the
plaintiffs was that the alleged will WAS
not executed by Senator Mcdonald and
that IT was fraud and a forgery. If
Genuine it was obtained by undue in
tuence end should be set aside on that
account. But the fight would he made on
the theory that the will Is forgery; that
IL Was not executed by Senator Mcdonald
nor witnessed by Alpheus snow or Park
Daniels. The reasons for believing the
VIII forgery were given in detail The
provisions OF the genuine will were known.
The senator had stated TO his con fdential
friends what disposition OF his property he
had made and what be had told aud what
the will declared we're widely at variance.
IL was queer. continued Mr.. Cropsey.
that man of McDonsld's habits should
have executed atype-wrtten WILL He was
O lawyer of the old school, He rarely had
recourse 20 stenographers and ty De- writers
and his Legal papers. no matter of what
length. were nearly always written IN his
own handwriting. IL was entirely I'M
proba bic that the testator would depart
irons his usual method in the drafting OF so
important document as his will
Again. III Article 3 of the alleged will
The Senator Was made TO bequeath 20 his
grandson. {. ;. Mcdonald. his gold watch.
tie had no grandson named G. :. Mcdonald
ma the hrst impression created by such q
biunder was chat crime had been
committed. Again. it apparent
that letter press COPY of the
will had been taken. If So who took it.
md for what purpose. Ii was also a fact
that the names signed were of tho same
slant. were apparently written with the
same pen-point and by the came hand
Mr.. CTopsey minntely described the law
Offices of Mcdonald, Butler * Snow
In The north room. he said
were two safes opened by the
gamefcOm biuaf m ha targ e..