The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-05-07
STEP.MOTHER IS BLAMED.
Heirs Of Rev. James P. Ludlow
Seek to Break His Will.
CLAIM He WAS WEAK MINDED.
Son and Daughter Of = Pioneer
Ha,tist PreacAer's First wife Al
lege That He Second Wife Prsju-
diced His Miua Against Then
Valuable Property II Involved
In the Present Legal Contest.

An attempt to break the will OF the lafe
Rev. lanes Peter Ludlow. one OF the pio-
ncers OF Seattle, - In progress In the pro-
bate department Of the superior court. The
proceedings were CONNIE need yesterday by
Mrs Clara q. Tarte and DIR. William L.
Ludlow. children OF the first wife OF the
decedent, who aiiege that their father was
induced TO tisinherit them through undue
influence on the part OF his second wife.
Eliza J. I.udiow Valuable city property
and real ee.ate outside the city are IN
volved In the contest. Mr.. LUDLOW having
accumulated considerable OF this worlds
goods before his death.
The son and daughter. In their petition
for the revocation Of the courts order pro-
batting tho disputed viii. aliege that the
document In invalid and was not signed by
the testator or by any person under his d.
rection or in his presence. and that the ies-
sator a.. the time Of the purported execu-
tton OF the document, and long before and
afterward, was OF unsound mind and men-
tally ineapacitatsd from making a will or
q proper distribution OF his property. and
was unduly Influenced and coerced by his
wife and divers other persons 10 the petit
tioners' unknown"
Against the st~pmsther.
The respondents. against whom the court
Is asked to issue citations requiring them
TO appear and anAwer the petition ans: Show
cause why the prayer OF the petitioners
should not be granted. are the widow and
stepmcther. Eliza J. Ludlow and Charles
II. Black. who are now acting As exceu
tors Of the alleged will. ana Theodore j.
ard James g. Ludlow. minor sons OF the
decedent By bis second wife. all Of whom
reside in Seattle. though Mrs. Ludlow and
her two sons are now temporarily absent
frem the state.
II - against their sscpmosher ,ha, fha
.~4~
They ailege that. pursuing a plan 10 do
fraud them Of their r.gnss. she wron fully.
guiawfuGy ard unduIy influenced her hus-
hand az a time waen he was not of sound
mind ard memory TO cisnheri; his first
xife's children and devise to her abso,u ute
IN his whole estate. both real and personal
70 the great wrong and damage OF the
petitioners.
The latter further aiiege that their father
was always vel. clsposed 10 them and
loved saem as his children 80 long an he
was OF sound mind. but that about ave
years prior 20 his death. which occurred
May l. i1& he became mentally deranxed
ard under the undue influence Of his s4e.-
ord Wife conceived q violent prejudice
against the Offspring OF his first marriage.
refused to recognize them as his children
compelled them. although faithful and de-
voted chiisr~n. to refrain from seeing him
or visiting kis home.
PvovtstSns 81 the win.
This alleged pre5saice the petitioners at.
tribute to the wrongful Actg' and s'un-
reasonable and inesmprehen xsble conduct"
II Nra Lulaow toward her sssp children.
m - ~3a1Da oAA malicious rsoortx' mad