The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-11-14
FIGHT FOR A Big ESTATE
TAKING OF TESTIMONY CONCLUDED
IN THE OsGOOD CASE.
Effort to Place Mrs. Rebecca Adams
on the stand FaiIs-Argument De-
ferred-Other Local Court News.

All the evidence In the suit of Ida Os-
good Stanley against Charles w. Osgood
and others to quiet the title to the $750,0oo
estate left her by her foster father, Mason
j. Osgood, was concluded before Judge
Carter yesterday afternoon. The hearing
of the argument was deferred until Nov. 80.
The greater part of yesterday. morning
was taken up with argument on the ques-
ton of whether the plaintiff had the right
to estop the cross-complaint of the defense,
by which they sought TO disprove the
plaintiffs title TO the estate. The argu-
ment was brought about by the attempt of
the plaintiff to place Mrs. Rebecca Adams
upon the stand TO testify concerning the
residence of the plaintiff with Mr.. and Mrs.
Osgood after her adoption by them. The
defense objected TO her testimony for the
reason that the evidence would not be in
rebuttal to any evidence given by the de-
tense. The attorneys for the plaintif then
argued that they had the right to show the
relation which existed between the plain
tiff and her foster parents in order to Sc
cure an estoppel of the cross-complaint
of the defendants. Ferdinand Winter, at
torney for Mrs. Stanley, declared that his
client had been brought up by the Osgoods
in the belief that she was their own child
After separating the girl from her father,
Americas Fisk, no court equity would have
permitted MIN 10 contest the Valulty Oh
the adoption.
ATTORNEY HARVEY OBJECTED.
Mr.. Harvey, attorney for the defense, OBJ
jected to the testimony of Mrs. Adams for
the reason that the defense had not offered
any evidence ON the cross-complaint which
the plaintiff could answer. The defense
won it's point and Mrs. Adams was ex-
cused without being examined.
Counsel for the PLAINTIFF called James
Jacobs, a veteran of the civil war, who now
lives in the Soldiers Home at Marion, to
contradict the evidence of Allen Fisher,
given Thursday, concerning Fisk's voting
at the city election in Noblesville, in 1871.
Jacobs testified that he was with FISK the
entire day on which the election ailuded 10
by Fisher occurred. and that he did not
vote. as Fisher testified he had done. In
answer to a question asked him., In oruer
to show that Fisk's residence was still In
this city. while ne was working in Mobiles
vile, Jacobs said that during all the time
that he CFisk) was i'm Noblesville, Fisk had
not had his children with him.
COULDN'T SHAKE 1T.
The defense tried in vain to shake the
evidence of Jacobs by p~ropounding numer-
Gus questions, but the old soldier was al
ways ready with an answer. After an i'm
mense number of questions asked the old
soldier by Judge Ayres. of the defense. 1t
was ascertained that Jacobs had come to
this city with Attorney Allen, of Marion.
and that Allen had paid his fare Judge
Tyres produced a paper purportlnS 10 De
signed by Jacobs while he was in the Sold
iers' Home at Danville, ILL., Jacobs admitted
that he had signed the paper. The paper
recited the story of Jacobs meeting a former
civil war comrade, Frank Hawkins, as he
(Jacobs) was going in to vote, substantial
ing the story told by Fisher on the stand
yesterday. The paper also stated that Fisk
had voted.
George Higgins. of indianapolis, was also
placed on the stand in rebuttal for the
plaintiff and testified that he worked in
NobIesville during 1877, the year that Fisk
worked there and that Fisk had acquired
no residence in that city. He also testified
that he had never heard of Fisks children
being there with him..
Both sides here rested their case, having
introduced all the rebuttal evidence.