The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-01-31
ATTORNEYS ARE WORKING
TO REACH A COMPROMISE
IN OSGOOD ESTATE CASE
Suit Now Under Amusement by
Judge Carter Involves Proper
ty Worth $4,000.
GREAT LEGAL BATTLE.
Mrs. Clarence Stanley Sued to
Quiet Title to Estate Left by
Late Mason J. OSgood.
QUESTION OF ADOPTION
Result of Suit Hinged on Legal
Technicality-Review of the
Litigation.
GREAT LEGAL BATTLE
QUESTION OF ADOPTION

After one of the greatest legal battles
that has ever been waged in the county
courts, in which some of the best legal
talent the State has produced has taken
part, the famous suit of Mrs. Clarence
Stanley formerly Miss Ida Osgood, against
Charles w. Osgood and Mrs. Roxanna o.
Minis to quiet title to the s750000 estate left
her by her adopted father, Mason j. Os-
good will be compromised
All the attorneys interested in the case
have been very busy since the conclusion of
the argument on Dec. before Judge Carter
in an attempt to reach a compromise which
would be satisfactory tc both sides of the
case. Two weeks ago it was thought that
a compromise had been reached by which
the defendants, Charles w. Osgood and
Mrs. Roxanna o. Minis, were to receive
$4,000 while the bulk of the estate was to
go to Mrs. Stanley. Since that time. how
ever, the terms of the compromise have
been materially changed and the attorneys
have met many times in the effort to reach
an amicable agreement. 1t is now probable
that compromise will be reached before
the end of this week
Judge Carter has had the case under ad-
visement since Dec. and il is understood
that no decision will be handed down in
the case until compromise has been signed
by all the parties to the suit
TRIAL OF THE CASE.
The trial of the case was begun before
Judge Carter, of the Superior Court, on
Nov. II, 1903, and it required three days
in which to take the testimony. The argu-
ment of the case was set down for hearing
for Nov. 30, and it required three days
to present both sides of the case to the
court. Mrs. Stanley was represented by
Addison c. Harris Ferdinand Winter and
Wilson & Townley. Ayres, Jones & Hol-
lett and Harvey, Pickens. Cox & Kahn
represented the defendants.
The whole question involved in the case
was whether the adoption of Ida Osgood
was valid Linton a. Cox, one of the at
torneys for the defense, in his opening
statement to the jury, said that the adop-
ton, which was made on Sept. IL, 1877, was
invalid for the reason that at the time the
adoption was made in Marion county the
father of Miss Osgood, Americus Fisk lived
at Noblesville, in Hamilton county, and did
not appear at the proceedings. Mr.. Cox
made the further point that when an adop-
ton takes place 1t is necessary that the
father of the one adopted appear, and fur
ther that the adoption should take place
in the resident county of the parent.
Tile plaintiff introduced evidence to show
with Mason j. Osgood, had acquired a resi-
dence in this city. number of witnesses
were called who testified on this point, the
most important of whom was Mrs. Re
becca Adams, who was intimately acquaint-
ed with the family of Mason J. Osgood
The defense introduced Mrs. Charles Rash
ig, who adopted a sister of Mrs. Stanley
about the same time that Mrs. Stanley was
adopted by Osgood. An attempt was made
to show by this witness that the father OF
Mrs. Stanley never relinquished his claim
to the girl until after the adoption proceed
ings. Mrs. Rashig said on the stand that
the girls father frequently visited his
daughter while she was with the Osgoods
and before her adoption. By this evidence
the defense sought to prove that Mrs. Stan.
leys residence at the time of the adoption
was in Noblesville, the home Of the father
FISK'S RESIDENCE.
The defense called Allen Fisher by wnon
it was sought to prove that Americus Fish
had acquired a residence in Noblesville
Fisher testified that Fisk had voted at &
city election at that place in 1877. TIL,
plaintiff used James Jacobs, veteran OF
the civil war, who now lives at the Sol
| CONTINUED ON PAGE 8, COL. p