Daily press. [volume] (Newport News, Va.) 1896-current, 1898-06-11
MRS. LANCER BEATEN.
She Should Not Have Signed the Las

She Should Not Have Signed the Last
Deed.
The Lancer case has been decided
and Mrs. Lancer has lost. Almost the
entire time of Judge Blackstone's court
Thursday was taken up With it,. Able
Speeches were made by the attorneys
MIR. Francis F. Causey. of this city. and
Colonel Alfred P. Thorn, of Norfolk.
representing the plaintiff. and Messrs
Soykin & Lett, Of Newport News
and Mr.. F. S. Collier. of Hampton,
appearing for the defendant
The history of the case. briefly re-
cited. is AZ follws: In 1894 Henry I.an-
Ger. Of Phoebus proposed marriage to
Julia A. Lindsay. with whom he had
been keeping company for some time.
Mrs. Lindsay. however. withheld her
hand. pending the transfer to her of
certain real estate In Phoebus owned
by Mr.. Lancer. The latter finally
consented to make her a deed for the
property and the marriage took place.
Some time later Mr.. Lancer informed
his wife that his mother vas very III
at her home in New York and asked
her to go TO that city with him. Mrs.
Lancer consented. Soon after their ar
rival in New York a conference. which
was conducted in German. took place
between MIR. Lancer and his sisters
Afs's. Lancer was present but not UNI
Outstanding the language. did
not know what was said. But
Immediately, she says. her husband
told her that his mother was very much
concerned about the property, which
she desired should be held In the Ian
Ger name. it having passed out of the
family when it was made over to her
as Julia A. Lindsay. In order to over
come the difficulty Mr.. Lancer told his
wife it would only be necessary for
her to sign a deed transferring the
property to his mother who would at
once deed 1t back to her as Julia a.
Lancer. The latter finally agreed to
this arrangement, and shortly after
ward she and her husband returned to
Phoebus. Meantime. MIR. Lancer's
mother died and the wife. thinking it.
time that she had her deed, asked Mr..
Lancer about it.. According to her
statement. Mr.. Lancer's reply, which
was brief. convinced her that he and
his sisters in New York had conspired
to defraud her, and she SO charged.
Her opinion was confirmed by the sub
senuent transfer OF the property to
Mr.. Lancer. A few weeks later. their
differences having been tamporarily
Smoothed over, she was told that a
debt OF several hundred dollars hang
ing over the property threatened Sc
rious trouble and Lancer asked her
to join him in making deed of trust
to secure the money to. discharge it.
Believing, she says. that his state
sntIll was utHIut, size dlu 81, DuL SOOIl
arterward learned that instead of a
deed of trust she had signed another
deed conveying the property to her
husband Thus. Mr.. Lancer held two
deeds. one from his mother and the
ot her from his wife.
Judge Blackstone held that the New
York transaction was fraudulent. but
added that Mrs. Lancer. knowing her
husband as she did and being aware
that his purpose from the start had
been to regain possession of the prop
erty, had had ample warning and
should have ascertained the nature OF
the paper alleged to be a deed Of trust
before signing 1t.
The real estate in question is said