The Washington times., 1895-03-08
NO CONTEST OYER The WILL
Douglass Childrea Positively Deny the
Story Sent from Rochester.
Inc Widow Also Declares That 1t Is Abso-
lrtely Untrue-RelatiOns Of the
Family Altogether Pleasant.

Inc children and the widow Of The rats
Frederick Douglass deny in the most ros-
i'lve terms that there are any unpleasant
feelings between them OF that there il aDv
intention on the part tof the children To con-
test their fathers viii.
The eanard originating in Rocbestar "
l., and published yesterday in The Times
and other papers was the cause OF corst,,e--
abe surprise and annoyance To the bafrs -
the Douglass estate. The telgraphie story
was in brief. that there was a family row
over the division OF the estate. fncludin,
a proposed contest Of the VIII and a &c.
that the widow had used undue fprTuanco.
TO gain possession by deeds and otherwise
oil The greater share or Mr.. Douglass,
property.
ne story originated with a man named
Lee an attorney Of Rochester. who. il was
learned yesterday, was the agent for Mr.
douglass OF house in Rochester. which
house was sold to Mr.. Douglass by his son.
ln4aw. Mr. Nathan sprague, an attorney
ne Whole story was denounced to The
IAnes yesterday by Nh. Lewis n Do1o-Jsss
cloth --O' u
why. this fellow Lee he said Sc No.
tue KIND we would employ IL We had aDv
sUcn intention as he announces He Is
merely trying 10 give himself a Iif-Is
prominence by mixing himself I'D in our
affairs" IL O~A
MI Douglass described him as "a little
NulppeI snapper whose story was not
worth the tine 1t took to denouuce it. but
I2 nj
authority, ne and his brother. Charles p
Douglass. had united in a card for the
press I'D which they deny that there has
peen any consultation with aBy one in
reference 10 the Will and that there is anv
ahtagoniSm between them and the wife and
widow of their father.
Mr.. Robert Douglass said that tbe-a ,r-,z
absolutely no foundation to the rerort 1--ricb
was telegraphed to yes terdav's uapers
rom @ rochester, n. Y. that the late Fred
erlCk Douglass children would contest bis
VIII when Offered Tor probate at Wash
lhgton- Mr. Douglass said that he did
not even Know mat there was any Will, and
'uSt tne statement was fabrication.
MT Natnan spraguc also denied ths-truth
OF the story on behalf OF Mrs Spraeue. his
WLe, the oldest daughter of Mr.. Douglass
MIS- Douglass, the widow. was also called
upon at Cedar Hill. She said.
les, L nave seen the story. but I don't
'AAinA IL heeus any contradiction and es-
peClally among those who knew the relations
e@istlng between my husband and myself.
or among those who knew him or myself
IN answer 10 the question as To lis fryltb
untrue
AS TO the alleged unpleasant relations
between yourself and the childrpn7''
Ihere Is not word of truth in IT.
funeraI?'' " al 'Ae
Absolutely without foundation: no one
VINO knew Mr. Douglass and myself wouId
Deiieve that to be other than fabrication. y
MFs. Nathan Sprague, by the way. was
win MIS-. Douglass yesterday, and there
,N., were certainty no evidences of any but the
kIhdilesJ feelings among them. Mrs
sprague, who is a very acconplisbe,I
ana educated lady was, for a long time
Ihe private secretary of her distinguished
rather. IL IS said that there was a coolness
between her and Mrs. Douglass soon after
the second marriage, but that story vas
also denied yesterday.
Where is the VIII, and what is the
amount OF the eState2 are the two remain
ing interesting questions. The Times
solved both Of them yesterday. II can be
stated on good authority that Mr. Lewis
h Douglass has charge of the VIII. and
that il is not and has not been in possession
OF the widow.
The amount of the estate was definitely
stated by the late Mr.. Douglass to be much
less than $500 600.
II can also b. stated that the VIII is in
one -efthe banks of this city. probably tba
Capital Savings Bank
Inc VIII must be pTObated ON or
before Tuesday next. Satisfactory pro-
VISION mas been made for all concerned.