The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1897-05-19
MRS. BALLS CLAIM.
Says Decided Away Her Interest
Through False Representation.
Brother and Two Sisters Claimed to Have
Signed Under Same Conditions.

The trial Of tho suit of MARY T. Ball
against Willia.l Randall. real estate
broker of this city, took place today in the
Appellate Court this morning. Mrs. Ball
claims that she was induced bv her father
and Mr.. Randall to sign of her interest
as an heir to one-third of "a 12-acre lot ON
Plainfleld street on the understanding
that she was only granting.a right of way
to Mr.. Randall.
Mrs. Balls father and mother lived on
this lot and in 1854 conveyance of it was
made but the acknowledgment of Mrs.
Wellman, the mother of the plaintiff was
not In accordance with the requirements
of the statutes.
The plaintiff testified that she was mar
ried In 1861 and that her father died in
1884, In 1882 the latter. came to her
homo in knightsvillc, Cranston, with the
defendant and said that he wished her to
sign paper that was not OF much account
and simply gave Mr. Randall right OF
way to an old graveyard that was in the
lot The paper was read TO Mrs. Wall but
she claimed she did not understand 1t nor
did she then care much what 1t was about
as Mr.. Randall said he could get along
without her signing but thought it
would be more agreeable if she did sign.
Before he went away Mr.. Randall gave
her $40 for her trouble.
Mrs. Ball said the names of her sister
and brothers were Susan A. Gross. George
A. Wellman and Henry Wellman. The
latter bad died leaving n nephew, who,
IL was testified today, got $1,000 for sign
ing off his interest in the property. She
positively denied that there was anything
said about the paper transferring her
right in the lot in question.
On cross-examiation Mrs. Ball admitted
that the land was sold by her parents,
George and Nancy Welman to George b.
bp iaH oh xvitp o.sd he,
father and mothers signature and said
that the name Mary Wellman upon the
deed must mean someone else as she was
too young to sign. This sale was the
reason of her family moving off the prem
ises She did not know how much her
parents got from the sale but had heard IL
was $1,000 This latter statement was made
Notwithstanding the protest Of her coun-
sci. In answer To "a question she said she
did not know there was anything wrong
with the deeds of her parents. The first
intimation she had that Mr.. Randall
claimed she had signed her rights to him
was when she heard that j. Erastns
Lester. Esq, had secured the $1,000 for
her nephew.
George Wellman testified that he signed
what he supposed was right of way.
Mrs. Gross the sister of Mrs. Ball testified
To the same effect Mrs. Nancy Wellman,
the second wife of the father of the pre-
~
her husband speak of a right of way.
Counsel for the plaintiff said Co her:
"Your name is also Nancy, like Mr.. Well
mans first wifey"
Yes" was the answer.
lis there, again asked the counsel,
"a tombstone with the name of two
Nancy Wellmans names on 1t as well az
the name of George Wellman"
'Yes, " was the response of Mrs Well
man in a matter OF fact way. And the
body of George Wellman does not repose
under that tombstoneP' That Is So"
continued the widow.
Mr.. Randall testified he never said any.
thing about a right OF way To grave
yard, as he knew the graveyard had been
long abandoned; that he never gave any.
one money To sign the paper he presented
to the children of George Williams and
that i'm the transaction he simply acted as
notary i'm an effort to clear the title A
bank had refused To loan money on the
land owing To the faulty acknowledge
ment Of the first Mrs. Williams TO the deed
conveying the property TO George Il. Ed
wards.
1t was shown during tho hearing that
Mr.. Williams was threatened with big
suits unless he had the title Strengthened
out.
William III. Greene was attorney for the
plaintiff and Comstock X Gardner attor-
neys for the defendant.