The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1900-03-04
BY GEO. D. ARMIsTEAD.)

temporarily closed two weeks ago.
hitch occupied the time and atten-
the Fourteenth district court for
month. has attracted attention all
ke United States and Mexico. News
as far away as New York havc
sought reports from this roman
cation and an interested public still
PATIENTLY for the outcome. The case
ready gone through two heated
les, one in the county court and
Bcond in one of the local district
and the litigation may be said
bnly fairly begun.
n following statement concerning the
a was prepared for The Post cor
13dent by one of the attorneys in the
& Ind is intended as bare facts:
1.-The 30th of July, 1896, General
Z made a will of his Texas prop
(which probably is worth 100000.
larger valuations have been placed
IA his property in statements and ar
ts. but such valuations have not
Bupported by the statements of wit
The property in Texas was de-
by General Msxia to his two daugh-
mes Mexia and Adele Mexia, with
ception of small devise to c.
Ma. who claims to be an heir. On
b OF August, 1896, General Mexia
q will relating to his property III
y epublic of Mexico, and this will
u Executed in conformity to the pro-
~ Of the Mexican code. and he de-
E*all of his property situated in ths
W icl of Mexico to his two daughters,
&&ietia and Adele Mexia, with the ex-
"a Of small part thereof devised
Nh w, Mexia. General Mexia was
EN- with paralysis on the morning OF
III of August, 1896, just as he was in
et Of taking the train in the City
kico for the United States. He never
Uncovered his consciousness and died
40 18th of September, 1896.
14n afterwards the Texas will of date
M 30th of July. 1896. was expressed to
eRl yexia's attorney at Groesbeeck
ny telegram he was directed to pro-
1.-The will The suit was filed in the
AZ court on October or November,
|s%to probate the will and the case
Stried IN that court in the latter part
the Meantime. the Mexican will.
ch made substantially the same dis
1ination against @. w. Mexia, had been
1ated in the proper court in the City
and certified copy OF TINS
bate proceeding and the will were for
ded to Texas, and the attorney for
dtvisees under this will and the Texas
y He'd an application to probate and
nd the Mexican will which was acted
n}n the county court of Dallas coun-
|QQn after the Texas will was probated
Lh&r cou,t. and the Mexican will was
MED toirecord in Dallas county. No
Lest was made in Mexico by c. w.
Il9 in Mexico resisting this probate OF
Vill. When the Texas will was pro-
"a in the county court the contestant,
VI. Mexis appealed to the district
r& II Isl the appeal from this judg
lfpf the Dunty court that has engaged
4Ftention of the Dallas district court
the past month. The contest was
"a upon tie charge Of mental incapac
o. General Mexia to make valid Will
the both If July. 1896. and under IN
nee ALLEGED to have been exercised by
$ Mexia n framing the execution Of
Iwill. The case was submitted TO the
upon special issues made by the
Idings.
be jury in its verdict found that he
ttestamenAry capacity. but that he
unduly Influenced.
tier the appeal from the county courts
perfected natural daughter of GEN
Mexia-Arlada Luz MeHia-made her
Sc party to the suit and she in her
kof Intervention made precisely the
n Issues as were made by c.. w.
H.. but she proved on the trial that
.sFas the daughter of General Mexia
&sproXy marriage and common law
<lRge antedating the marriage of GEN
|{Aexia to the mother of the devisees
the Texas will. The second feature
b proxy marriage as developed by
stimony is that Mary Gray, the al
bride. was in the city of New York
General Mexia was in the city oe
Go, Mexico. at the time of this mar
ION July 80, 1867. General Mexia
len in the Mexican army. But it is
that If this proxy method OF
1ge was not the proper and legal
hi becoming one and indivisible, yet
ards common law marriage was
b between Mary Gray and General
before the date of his marriage to
tther OF the devisees under the WILL
testimony upon the subject of this
41en law marriage was highly sensa-
!&[<and will not bear publication. The
|yNeys for the proponents OF the will
q Plat all this testimony with regard
&%prevlous marriage was admissible
{{p so far as 1t might bear upon the
Ion OF mental capacity. and this Is
}ew Of the judge trying this case as
by his charge.
seem to think that no marriage or
2 md can be shown or proved be-
General Mexia and Mary Gray. 1t
Seem from this statement that tho
ION has just freshly begun. unless
~ case now pending the Will should
bated in the appellate courts for
ID seem that all the testimony IN
!W to this marriage determines and
& nothing, and II the proponents
4@4 fail to probate this will then a
&Wll have tc determine the rights OF
imants to General Mexias estate
s. General Mexia made VIII in
Which was deposited with l.. j..
[ OF Groesbeeck. Texas. deyising
IDS in Texas to his wife. Sarah r..
"a and to the devisees OF ths will of
1896, and to Armada Luz Meyia.
be an interesting question II tho
,2X July 3d. 1896. should not be pro-
whether General Mexia's estate will
directed by the will Of 1886 o.
n he is intestate as to his property
as. and In such an event, who Ia
10 it under our statutes of descent
4 tribution?
interesting testimony was read by
pponents from several distinguished
Prs OF the Mexican congress, who
In that body with General Mexla
te past ten or fifteen years. as "a
fntal capacity. some OF them being
pic. Many OF these gentlemen saw
.nyersed .Nnsh General Mexia on the
.N& pay the WI was made and testified
a. ere was nothing unnatural or sim
In his language or acts. and they
mind xvaa narfaotlv sound ar IN :