The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1894-07-12
STATEMENT BY MR.. RODGERS
Did Not Believe the Petitioner
Was His Nephew.
THE SECOND WILL A FORGERY.
Outline of the Widows Case-The
jury Selected and to Go to
Trial To-Day.

days, jlry has been obtained TO try the
Martin will con tel. and for the next three
or four weeks twelve citizens will have the
burden of listening to testimony from
which they will be expected to decide
whether or not the second will, giving one
third of the estate to the infant son of
Mrs. j ohm 3. Martin. is a genuine docu-
ment or not.
The courtroom occupied by Judge
Coffey was crowded yesterday, as it was
anticipated that jury would be found in
a very little while Mrs. Henry Martin,
widow of the deceased capitalist, by whose
| first will she inherts the whole OF the
| $780, COO estate, was in court. surrounded
| by her numerous attorneys, and so was
| Mrs. Isabella Martin, mother and guar
dian of the little three-year-Old pToponent
of the second will. now in dispute. AS for
John B. Martin Jr.. as he is called, he
seemed to vote the whole proceedings a
| bore. and, not I'm derstanding the why or
wherefore of his presence in that august
assent iage amused himself by playing
W it'll his nurse. running out Of the court
room every now and then to get breath of
! sO-Caled fresh air outside.
After very careful questioning of a lar ge
number of jurors. and the constellation us
using-up Of four peremp:ory challenges on
either side. the following twelve jurors
| were selected to try the case: Bernard F..
| Wormbod Afr ed c. RulofsOn, William
! B. Pollock, j. B. Mersing, j. f. Steinke,
! c. B. Abraham. NJ r. Dempster jeremiah
! Hurley. Samuel A. Taylor, T. A. Stolz
Henry Varman and Patrick j. Cody.
| 1t was we'll on in the afternoon before
this result was arrived at, but before ad-
| journing the opening statement of the
contestant of this proposed second will,
| /. e. Mrs. Henry Martin, on whom the
| burden of dsproof lies. was made by
! Arthur Rodgers. 1t was a brief history
| of the case, together with an outline of
what the attorneys representing the widow
eXpec ed to prove.
! Mr.. Rodgers told how that Henry Mar
tin had died at the Palace Hotel in San
! Francisco on February 81, 1898. AT that
| time his wife, the Mrs. Henry Martin In
court. was Frustrated at The hotel with a
severe illness, and for two months was
| unable TO give any attention 0 business Of
any kind. Her niece, Miss Breed, of Los
Angeles, was staying with her the time,
! besides which the widow was under the
care Of competent nurses.
Mrs. Martins brother-in-law, said Mr..
Rodgers, MI Breed, was also at the Pal
| ace Hotel, while Mrs. Martin received
constant visits from ex-Mayor and Mrs.
| Pond, who were old friends of Mr. and
| Mrs. MoOTe-the name of Mrs. Martins
| first hus band having been Moore. Mr..
| Pond had been partner of the late Mr..
Moore in business
Mr.. Rodgers told how that the death of
! Henry Martin was quite uneXDected, that
! he had no idea that his was fatal Illness
| Consequently. the day after his death
Mr.. Breed, Mr.. Pond and II. l.. Hutchin-
ht f,oI
! for will. Furthermore, 10 ascertain the
whereabouts of such document, if any
such existed, Mir. Pond applied for author
! iZaton papers TO descend upon the bank
of Cracker, WOolworth d Co., where Mr..
Martin had been in the habit Of keeping
! some valuable papers. \ similar order
was applied for III regard to the Safe De-
post Company'S premises. Judge Cotfey
granted the orders, and at the latter place
! the dead mans box was discovered.
| The box had n com bnatOn lock and ad
| to be opened BY ar artisan. On opening
1t a will signed by the dead man was found
! bearing date May Is. 1890, a Photographic
will, which left all the testator's fortune to
! his widow. Mrs. Henry Martin.
| Mrs. Martin herself was not in condition
! to apply for letters of administration and
here Pond came to the rescue again. A
| telegram was sent out TO a brother and
sister of New York, William Martin of the
! u,
! elderly unmarried lady, and a nephew of
the deceased, all three of whom were in
vited to proceed to San Francisco for the
! purpose of looking into the condition Of
| affairs. They came. and finding that Mrs
! Martin was on a fair way to recovery they
! returned to their homes In he East.
| AS soon as Mrs. Henry Martin had COM
pletely recovered she had conference
with Mr.. Pond on matters connected with
! the estate, which resulted in Mr.. Pond ap-
| plying to The court for letters OF admins
| tration. These were granted, due notice
o. all proceedings being sent to Mrs. John
b. Martin, widow of John 3. Martin,
brother of the deceased, and on Aprill IL
the will of Henry Martin was admitted TO
probate.
On June 30, 1898, what purported to be
second and later will of the deceased,
| bearing date February %, 1893. only four
days prior TO the teStator's death, was
filed by Mrs. John B. Martin, whose hus-
| band died 10 Trinity County some lime
before his brother. This will beQueathed
0ne-thIrd of the teslator's estate to his
widow, one-third to his brothers and sis
ters and one-thiTd to this three-year-old
John B. MarIiE Jr. Mrs. Martin fled
this document as guardian for her infant
son.
Notice of this will was sent to Mr.. Pond.
but the latter filed an answer denying that
such a document had ever been signed by
the late Henry Martin. subsequently,
when Mrs. Isabella j. Martin. or Mrs.
John b. Martin. filed an amended petition
answers thereto were filed both by Mr..
Pond and Mrs. Henry Martin.
This, said Mr.. Rodgers, was the issue
which Law before the court and jury On
behalf of the widow he and his associate
counsel expected to prove that this second
so-called will was forgery. Testimony
| would be offered in support of that confer
with the handwriting of the deceased. and
OF the will was not in the same hand as
other proven writings Of the testator.
Finally Mr.. Rodgers said he expected to
show that the second will was not in ac-
cordance with the intentions Of the de-
ceased He did not believe" said Mr..
Rodgers impressively. that this John 3.
Martin Jr. was his dead brothers SON."
That being so it was natural to suppose
that Mr.. Martin desired to make no be-
quest of any sort to this so-called nephew.
After beSpeaking the patience of the jury
for the next month or so Mr.. Rodgers re-
Sumed his seat.
Before court adjourned, Grove l.. John
son, on behalf of the infant proDonent of
the second will, asked that pending this
trial the probate of the first will be re-
yOked. He claimed that the In W demanded
that this be done. Judge Cotfey, however.
denied Mr.. JuhuSou'S motion.
Mr.. johnson then moved that the fees
and expenses be paid out OF the estate, but
this motion was lSo denied. A further
motion that the rule recurring cuurL fees