The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-06-06
HIS faint OF INSANITY
FATHER OF MOSES r. CHASE TO
PROVE 1T WAS INHERITED.
Testimony Of the Duhmes's Witnesses
Shaken on Cross-Exa mination-Df-
vOrce of Mrs. Alvina Brown.
Special to the Indianapolis Journal.

Special to the Indianapolis Journal.
LAFAYETTE. Ind, June 5.-The case OF
Moses Fowler Chase has been In progress
four days at Fowler and it has reached
the point where but one issue remains-the
soundness Of mind of the boy. The deter
mination of that issue will practically de-
termine the residence and consequently the
jurisdiction of Judge Rabb's court. Should
the plaintiff be able to prove to the jury
that the boy was insane at the time of his
coming into his majority, four years ago
yesterday. it is certain that the court will
instruct the jury to return verdict for
the father. If it can be proved that the
boy was mentally incapable on Nov "a, 1899.
when. by decree of the Tippecanoe Circuit
Court, his estate was turned over to him,
the papers he signed in favor of the Duhmes
will be practically void. The question OF
sanity at the time the petition Of Fred
Chase was filed on April l6 1903. has been
disposed of. The other question is now
being fought The Chase side will endeavor
to prove the startling fact that Moses Fow-
Ter Chase inherited insanity; that men,
bers OF the family of his grandfather were
demented; Testimony TO substantiate that
claim will be adduced in rebuttal.
The trial was opened this morning with
. r..
don, brain specialist of Cincinnati. who
was called to examine Young Chase after
he returned from Flint, Mich Nothing OF
Importance developed and the deposition OF
Mrs. Harriet Small, widow of the rector of
the Episcopal Church at Clifton, the SUI
burban home of the Duhmes and great
friend of theirs. was read: One of the i'm
portant features OF the deposition was the
telling of how Young Chase bought a type
writer for the Rev. Mr.. Small and ex-
planned the mechanism: This instance was
recounted to show the boys mental sound
ness. Considerable furry was created
when Sanford E. Thomas, telegraph oper-
ator at Otterbein was called TO the stand
for the Duhme side to tell what time the
train bearing Moses Fowler Chase passed
through Otterbein on its way to Lafayette.
He said the train was twenty minutes late
on the day on which the petition of Fred
S. Chase was filed in Lafayette. 1t was
the purpose of the Duhme counsel to prove
that the petition was filed before the boy
was in the county. On croSS-examination
it was shown that the tower where the
operator works is in Benton county, one
mile from the Tipecanoe line. Thomas adj
mited the train passed the tower at 12:39
and the summons was served on Moses
Fowler Chase at 1852 according TO the
sheriff Sheriff Foresman was called to the
stand and asked at what time he served
the summons but objection was taken and
sustained.
Immediately after dinner the attempted
introduction of the transcript of proceed
ings in the Hamilton Circuit Court of Ohio
was objected to by Mr.. Harris and 1T was
ruled out of court. 1t was a record of the
proceedings on June IL. 1899, In which Judge
Ferris set aside the decree of the Michigan
court and declared Moses +. Chase to be
a resident Of Ohio and person of sound
mind. Judge Rabb held that there was
no statute anywhere which authorizes a
person to have himself declared of sound
mind. Charles Maer, insurance agent, Of
Cincinnati, testified that Sept. 5, 1898.
Fowler Chase applied to him for an acct
dent policy of $4,000. The boy claimed he
was an inventor and machinist Under the
rules of the company a policy for s., 600
was written for Moses Fowler Chase. as a
machinist The policy was made payable
to Miss Margaret Tullidge. his fiancee, Of
Cincinnati The sixth witness was Will
liam Thorndyke, deputy auditor of Hamil-
ton county. Ohio. He testified that no
property of young Chase had been listed
for taxation in Hamilton county.
The deposition of Judge Howard Ferris,
Of Hamilton county, was read. He told of
proceedings before him on June IL. 1899.
when the Michigan court decree was set
aside. In cross-examnation he admitted
that the proceedings before him were un-
authorized by and statute.