The Washington times., 1902-03-18
Testator Left an Estate
Valued at Two Million
Dollars.
GRANDSON is THE CAVEAT0R
Mr. Charles H. Utermehle Contends That
He Is Entitled to a Fair Portion-Trial
Will Probably Continue : Month or
Six Weeks.

fore Justice Barnard. sitting for PROBATE
business. on February 10. was resumed
yesterday. Whes the matter was called
for trial postponement was made be-
cause of the illness of Mr.. A. S. Worth
ington. of counsel for the defence
At that time March 10 was set as the
date for the hearing to be resumed. 1t
was then discovered that Mr.. Worthins-
ton was engaged in the Supreme Court OF
the United States in the telephone cases.
and another postponement was granted
Died Leaving Two Million Estate.
Mr.. George w Utermehle died in this
city leaving an estate valued at about
So 600 600. all of which he disposed of by
will The greater part of his fortune was
left to his widow. and the remainder.
with the exception of a very small
amount, was left to his two daughters.
His will is now being contested by his
grandson. Mr.. Charles H. Utermehle. who
contends that he is entitled to a fair por
tion of the estate of his grandfather.
The contestor. MIR. Utermehle, is repre-
sented by R. Ross Perry & Son and Lam
bert & Baker. and the benefciaries under
the will of George W. Utermehle by
worthington. Heald & Frailey and Thos.
p. Woodward
II is expected that the trial will occupy
the attention of the court for a month OF
six weeks.
Jury Drawn in the Case.
The following named persons were
chosen as a jury to pass upon the issues
involved: John H. Grove. Harry F. Dunk
horst. J. Hiram Johnson. L. johnson
Fletcher. John W. Danenhower Augustus
B. Bishop. Frank G. Nolte. James E
Willis. Clarence E. Latimer. Charles H.
Lavender. Charles J. Foote and Grant S.
Kendrick.
AS soon as the jury was empaneled. Mr..
r. Ross Perry, of counsel for the ca
veator, Mr.. Charles II. Utermehle. in ac-
cordance with the decision recently rem
dered by Justice Barnard, allowing the
opening and closing of the case to the
caveator. began his opening address to
the jury.
Attorney PerIy's Statement.
He stated that George W. Utermehle
was born in Germany in 1875 and moved
to this country in 1892 when he was sew
enteen years of age; that he married a
Pennsylvania lady in 1895. and that
Charles H. Utermehle. ST., the father of
the caveator, and his twin sister. Rose NJ.
Taylor, were born in 1893; that Charles
II. Utermehle. ST., was the only son of
the testator, and that he was married in
1861. and died in 1867. leaving an estate
valued at about 100000
Mr. Perry traced the movements of
young Utermehle during the lifetime of
his father, and stated to the jury that
evidence would be produced to show that
rot only did the warmest personal feel
ing exist between the grandfather and
grandson. but that on several occasions
the grandfather had specifically stated
that he proposed making ample provision
for the future OF his grandson
Induced Not to Contest Will.
Mr.. Perry further stated that at the
time of the death of George W. Uter-
mehle, the grandson was induced to de-
sist from contesting the will upon the
promise of the other heirs that upon his
grandmothers death everything would be
made UP to him: but he declared that it
would also be shown not only was this
not done. but that between the time of the
death Of George W. Utermehle and the
death OF his widow. the large estate which
she derived from her husband had been
so disposed of under the control OF her
daughters that third share thereof only
amounted in money to abGct S5S.o00.
Nj Perry further stated that it would
Ilso be shown that George VI. Utermehle
did not acquire the greater portion Of his
estate himself, as had been generally sup
posed but that it was nearly all derived
from his father.
Actions Of Testator Criticised.
That he was always accompanied in the
latter years Of his life by caretaller. and
that his business was entirely looked af-
ter b. Mrs Taylor and her husband, Le-
roy Nj. Taylor; that the old man was in
the habit Of ws!king along the street
talking in most excited manner, and
holding protracted conversations with in
visible persons In short. the attorney
declared that his methods would be shown
TO he such as no sane man would have
adopted
Mrs. TAYLOR and DR.. Taylor, It was de-
clared were in close confidential Tcla-
tionship with him from the time of the
death Of the cayeator's father in 1861 up
until the time Of the death Of George W.
Utermehle
Mr.. Perry said il would also be shown
that Mrs. Taylor's Will was made shortly
after the death of her father. and that
IL would appear from that instrument
that Leroy N. Taylor had such influence
over his wife that he was enabled TO pro-
cure from her a viii in his favor which
cut oil their only son with the Deggafly
income OF $1,000 4 year. and which made
absolutely no provision for the testatriA
erandch;ld.
Eactc
Mr.. Perry closed with strong presen-
tation Of the facts, which he stated, would
be presented to the jury for consideration
upon the question of undue influence. He
said that it would be shown that from
1882 up 20 the time OF the death of George
W Utermehle both Dr. and Mrs.
Taylor had complete control of the affairs
md business OF George W. Utermehle. and
that degree by degree they so absorbed
this control, owing to the cnfeebled con-
dition Of the testator's mind by reason of
the encroachments and inroads made upon
his physical and mental condition by rea-
son of strong drink. that in 1887 they had
completed their mastery.
Al the conclusion of Mr.. Perry's re
marks, which had occupied the attention
hours, Mr.. a. s. Worthington, on behalf
Of the defence OF the caveatees, began his
opening statement 10 the jury.
Mr. worthington Takes Up Issues.
Mr. worthington took up the issues In
detail, explaining 10 the jury carefully
the legal meaning OF the question of es-
tOppeI, declaring that it was the policy
80 l.. fo raFt,co IN alIoW n man entitled