Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1901-03-07
THAT IS WHAT MRS. ELIZABETH
GRosE OF MEADERvILLE
SAYS IN HER ANSWER.
THE FATHER SAID he
WOULD CUT THEM OFF,
Alleged Misconduct on the Part Of the
Children of Daniel Grose Respon-
sible for Everything.

Elizabeth Ann Crosse Of Meaderville
has filed in the district court an answer
to the petition of James Grose and Ly-
dia Ann Roberts. objecting to the pro-
bate of the Will of Daniel Grose. Mrs.
Crosse is the executriX of the will and
the two who desire to have the order
of probate set aside are children of the
man who made it or is alleged TO nave
made it, In the document the two chill
dren, p and % years old. respectively
are entirely ignored in the matter OF
sharing in the estate ana they therefore
claim foul.
Crosse died in Meaderville on Septem-
Der II of last year and left an estate
of an estimated value of $4,000, of which
$4,000 is said to be in cash. The widow
was made the sole devisee 4 few weeks
ago the son was cited into court to show
cause why he should not turn over to
the estate a gold quartz watch chain
that had belonged to his father. The
boy told Judge Harvey the chain had
been given him by the widow two weeks
after the death of his father and that
it had always been understood he was
to have it. His sister corroborated the
statement. The judge ordered the young
man to exhibit the chain to the APP
praSers of the estate. This little Incl
dent was the beginning Of the attempt
Of the two children of the dead man to
have the order admitting the will to
probate set aside. In their petition the
two children stated that when Grose
made the will he was not himself and
the document had not been therefore
regularly executed.
1t was claimed that it was made While
the maker was under the influence Of
his wife. Elizabeth Ann Grose: that he
was at that time and for a long time
prior thereto in an enfeebled condition.
mentally and physically, as result of
a lingering illness and was not in the
full possession of his faculties.
In the answer Mrs. Grose strikes right
and left. She denies that the will is
not that of her husband and gives rea-
sons why the children We're ignored in
it's provisions. She says Grose was not
under the undue influence of herself OIL
any other person. but admits that he
had been i'll long time before he exc
cuted the Will. To this. however. she
adds that he was in the full possession
Of his mental faculties and that it was
his intention to omit the names of his
children because of the dsgra ceful. I'M
srateful. brutal and unchldIlle acts and
habits of the children, to-Wit: THAT on
or about the lst of June. 1900. during the
absence of the deceased in California fol
his health, James Grose. the son, beat
with his hands and --i-treated his mother
| in various ways and threatened to eject
| her from the premises: that at other
times he cursed and sWore at her and
, threatened her with bodily harm, and
/ that thereafter and before the return OF
the father, the son, being afraid to NEE,
/ him. left the city and did not return
until after his father died; and that the
son knew that the father Intentionally
omitted him from the will.'
Further, the widow says that The
/ daughter. on several occasions after The
/ return of her father from California, de
! clared that, on account of the will hay,
| ing been made in favor of her motha
| alone she had no respect for the mother
! that she. the widow. heard Daniel Gros,
say that. owing to his daughters mis-
| conduct and feelings towards her mothe
| he would. if he had many times tn
amount of property, give it to the moth
81.
In conclusion Mrs. Crosse asks the cour
to order the will to stand as prohated