Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1906-07-06
COURT
Rogers Will Case Has Occupied
the Center of the Stage Since
Our Last Report.

dulSs dpptlldIJS, was sui DelHR nedTu.
This is one of the most important cases
that has been tried in this County in
many years. The amount involved is
something like $40, 900 and the interests
concerned are numerous and widespread.
Caroline Rogers had, among other rela-
tives living in Ferrisburgh, a younger
sister, Lucy Adams, and a brother,
George Adams, and all had property. 1t
was agreed among the three at one time
that each should make a will bequeath-
ing all of the property of the two first
to decease to the survivor. Lucy died
March %, 1904, and George died on the
9Th, of the following May, leaving Mrs.
Rogers as the S urvivor to inherit. 1t
was found, however, that owing to an
omission in Georges will, only a portion
OF his property went to Caroline.
Rogers called it, was intentional or not,
was not a question in this case. But
after the deaths of this brother and sis
ter, Mrs. Rogers found herself in posses
OWN VI a NOiioibNih BlODNlIg LIS
she disposed of in a will dated August
9, 1905, and the testatrix died on the 9th
of the following October. 1t is this will
which was offered for probate and which
was allowed by Judge E. A. Hasseltine
of the New Haven district, from whose
decision an appeal was taken to the
County court. The contestants were
John Q. Adams of Ferrisburgh, and
James w. Adams of Lawrence, Kansas,
the surviving brothers and heirs at law
of the deceased testatrix. John Q.
Adams has a daughter and James w.
Adams has two sons Mrs. Rogers had
no children of her own.
By the terms of the will in question
requests were made in varying amounts
to a number of religious and benevolent
societies, including the Congregational
church society of Ferrisburgh, the
Church Building society, the Vermont
Missionary society and the American
Board lof Commissioners for Foreign
Missions. There were some small be-
quests to individuals and the home place
in Ferrisburgh was bequeathed to Rev.
and Mrs. George H. Bailey of that
town. Mr.. Bailey for several years had
been the pastor of the Congregational
church at F%errisburgh Center. There
was a provision, also, for the maintain
ence of George w. Smith, an oldish man
who for a number of years had been
Mrs. Rogers maj of all work.
The validity of this will was assailed
by the contestants on three grounds:
1t was claimed that the will offered had
not been duly executed according to law,
that the testatriX was not COMPETENT to
make a will at the time it was executed
and that undue influence had been
brought to bear upon the testatrix. Any
one of these three grounds, if fully es-
tablished to the satisfaction of the jury
would be sufficient to break the will.
A previous will had been executed by
Mrs. Rogers on the Goth of July, 1904.
This instrument was drawn up by Rev.
Mr.. Baily from memoranda furnished
him, as he testified, by Mrs. Rogers, and
it differed materially from the will in
court. The requests to the various re-
ligious bodies were practically the same,
but there was no bequest to the Bailys
and no provision for Smith. And there
were other differences. AS first drawn
up, the last clause of this will named
Tobn a apI Gaorna w Adams ac rasi-
Diary legatees. This clause, Mr.. Baily
testified, he had inserted of his own mo-
ton, but when the document was read
over to her Mrs. Rogers had fatty re-
torn out and the will was then execut-
ed at Mr.. Baily's residence. Had this
stood as the last will and testament of
Mrs. Rogers, the Adams brothers would
estate, as they were her next of kin and
heirs at law.
But according to Rev. Mr.. Bailey, Mrs.
Rogers told him this was only a temper
airy will. She left it in his care and di-
+. rected him never to destroy it until he
knew that another will had been filed
t in the Office of the Judge of Probate.
, Some time after Mr. Baily learned from
Judge Hasseltine that the will of August
8, 1908, had been filed in his Office the
former will vas burned, Mrs. Baily was
the one who destroyed the document.
In case the jury should find that the
1905 will was invalid for any reason then
the destroyed will, as established by pa
role evidence, would stand as the last
will and testement of Caroline W. Ro.
: gers.
such are the man outlines of this i'm.
portant case. There are numerous in
teresting minor points and side issues,
t but we have not space to go into them
f and indeed it is not necessary. And
such is the case over which for more