The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1901-07-15
news FROM GEORGETOWN.
Interest iii the Case of Niece
Against WEIGH and Others.

all OF whom are residents of Georgetown
is being watched with keen interest The
suit involves the ownership Of valuable
property on PENNSYLVANIA Avenue. OCCu-
pied by the United States Express Com
pauy. property on y Street in George
town and elsewhere The whole IS prob
ably valued at xl01.GG- The decision OF
Justice Norris. of the Court Of Appeals,
lust rendered, IS in substance as FOL
lows.
The facts as they appear from the bill
which. Of course. must for the present at
least. be assumed to be true are these
The property in controversy belonged to
one Nicholas Whelan. VINO died about the
year 1890. From him it descended to his
daughter Catherine Ann Whelan, who
died in Montgomery county. Nd, in the
year 1891 She was from birth feeble
minded and deficient in normal mental
capacity; and she remained through life
a simpletou, incapable of executing val
Id deed or contract She finally became
uotoriousIv insane. was so adjudged by
a jury of inquisition. and in such condi-
tiou died She lived and died upon a
farm in Montgomery county, Nd, which
also like the property here in controVer-
sy she had inherited from her father
Soon after the death of Nicholas Whe-
1870. by some means alleged by the com
plaiuants to he unknown to them, one
Thomas Connolly. also at the time a
resident of the said Montgomery county,
took IN his residence on the farm OF
Catharine Ann WheIan, assumed the
MANAGEMENT and control thereof and Of
all her affairs and kept her in contine-
rnent in her house, until his death
which occurred about August i, 1867
What his relationship, if any, was TO me
poor imbecile. or who her next OF KIN
were at the time, we are not Informed
by the bill of complaint.
ON or about July Is 1913, while -oh-
nelly thus had the imbecile WITHIN MS
power and control he fTaudulently pro-
cured from her deed of conveyance OF
the property in the city Of Washington
already mentioned which deed was duly
recorded among the land records Of the
District Of Columbia and he entered into
the possession and control Of the property.
When he died in 1852 the record title and
ownership became vested by descent in
his niece and sole heir at law. the appel
lee Mary J. WEIGH, who Yet remains such
record owner and pOssessor. subject only
to deed Of trust or mortgage thereon
for the payment of the sum of $500 and
interest. payable three years after date,
executed by her and her husband, her CO.
appellee. Edward P Welch, on or about
April .. 1891 which mortgage debt had
not become due when the original bill OF
complaint in this case was hled on Jan
uary g. 1880.
Connolly was unmarried at the Tune
at which ne took the possession OF Cath
arine Ann Whelan's property and affairs,
and at the time at which he procured
n.c hpn mo
toned He married in 1915. and his wife,
who survived him, continued the same
possession, control. and dominion after
his death and until the year 1850 In this
last mentioned year one Susan A BeaN,
Of said Montgomery county, now deceas-
ed and others not named in the bill OF
COMPLAINT. whether related to CathaTine
Ann WhcIan or not does not appear, filed
their petition IN the court in that county
for an inquisition Of Iunacy in the case Of
said Catharine Ann WheIan, whereupon
said Catharine Ann Whelan was adJudged
a lunatic and Susan A. Beail was appoint
ed committee Of her person and trustee OF
her estate
''On November o. 1851, said Susan A
BeaIl. as such trustee, and Benjamin
BeaU. her husband now also deceased
fled their bill in equity in the Supreme
WeIch and Edward P. WEIGH. already
mentioned. and one Henry Nailor, who
held certain mortgages on the property in
controversy. created by Thomas Connolly,
but subsequently, it would seem, satisfied,
to vacate the deed OF July 10 1873, fraudu-
IentIy procured by Thomas Connolly from
Catharine Ann WheIan- This suit Iiuger-
ed in court for upwards Of twenty-seven
years Testimony was taken in it, but,
with the exception Of some few unimport-
ant papers, both the pIeadings and tesi-
mcny have disappeared from the files Of
the court and are not to be found, and
they are charged to be in the possession
OF under the control If said Mary J.
WEIGH and Edward P WEIGH or. at all
events. 10 be somewhere within their
knowledge
After the death Of Catharine Ann
WheIan the heirs os Thomas Connolly
pr0pouuded for probate paper writing
purp0rtiug 10 be the last VIII and tesla
meut Of Catharine Ann WheIan and bear
Ing date September ., 1914, about ten
months prior TO the marriage Of Con-
nelly. BY this alleged will and testament
CaJhariue WheIan purpCTted to devise
and bcqueath all her estate to Connolly.
Susan !. Beall falsely representing her
self, as the bill OF complaint alleges, TO be
one Of the heirs-at-Iaw Of Catharine Ann
WheIan filed a caveate to the probate OF
the viii. naming Mary J WeIch, Edward
p WeIch and Sarah 4 Connolly the
widow Of Thomas Connolly, as caveatees
a compromise was finally reached, the
cavcat withdrawn, viii admitted and
property equally divided between Susan
a Bsau and Mary J. WEIGH
The complaiuauts aIIege that they had
If
time at which it was made The complain
ants tweuty-sIX in number Of whom
eighteen reside in the District Of Column
bia, one in Virginia, one in Illinois. and
SIX IN Montgomery county. Maryland. al
legc themselves to be the next OF kin and
sC'e HsirS-at-Iaw OF Cathar.ne Ann Whe-
Ian, but that they had little acquaintance
or association with her, supposed that
Connolly had been duly appointed her
guardian, had no reason to suspect him
and had no suspicion Of his fraud until
within three years before the institution
Of the suit
A general demurrer. on the ground
that there WAS no equity in the bill was
inJerpus-d in behalf Of the WeIches. and
the holders Of a certain deed Of trust de-
INJURED on the ground Of IaCheS The
court sustained the demurrer on the
ground Of Iaches and dismissed the bill"
From a decree of dismissal the present
appeal has been prosecuted Justic. Nor
rIs holds that. while It is startling 70 find
a UIli IN equity ulcd To procure th- avail
Hsut Of deed Hfty-eight years old and
the defence Of lHChcS. and long delay is
on that naturally suggests itself yet in
view OF the allegations Of the bin Of
complaint, and of the extraordinary cir