The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-05-23
The Document Is Produced in
Court by Her Counsel.
Appears to Be No Question Re-
garding ItsAuthenticity.
NO STANDING IN COURT
If Trustees Are Recognized
''Next Friends. Cannot Be.
Determination of Point Rests
With the Presiding Judge.

! Concord, n. H, May 23.-There
was an interested crowd of spectators,
mostly Christian Scientists. in the
Merrimac county court house today
when the hour arrived for the hearing
| of the suit brought by the next
| friends of Mrs. Mary Raker G. Eddy
against Calvin A. Frye and several
other Christian Scientists for an ac-
counting of the property of Mrs.
Eddy, leader and founder of the sect
| Women predominated- in the assem-
| blage.
Judge Chamberlain announced re-
garding the motion made on Monday
that he rule on the question of Mrs.
Eddy's capacity, that he would not
try this main question at this time.
He said that arguments, should be
confined strictly to the question of the
Intervention of the trustees.
General Frank S. Streeter of coun-
sci for the defense. addressed the
court. This suit, he said was brought
not by Mrs. Eddy, but without her
knowledge and against her wishes.
Three trustees appointed by Mrs.
Eddy to take charge of her property
wished to be substituted as complain
ants in this suit. They asked this as
matter of legal right, said Mr.
Streeter, and they appeared in court
under authority of Mrs. Eddy's trust
deed.
Mr. Streeter produced the docu-
1t is admitted by both sides that
this is a genuine deed duly signed by
Mrs. Eddy and recorded. Under it
the trustees took possession of Mrs.
Eddy's property and have since man
aged 1t.
Mr.. Streeter summarized the pro-
visions of the deed and it's directions
and reservations. He laid especial
,1,o 81, IA
uing Mrs. Eddys past policy in re-
gard to investments directing the ter
limitations of the trust at the death of
Mrs. Eddy.
IF the deed is Valid said Mr..
Streeter, mot only all Mrs. Eddy's prop
erty but this action as well has been
transferred to the trustees and they ask
that they be allowed to carry it on.
IF Mrs. Eddys competency to make
this deed is regarded as material then
this question must be decided first" said
Mr.. Streeter. ..-a
Next friends action can be brought
only when the nominal complainant is
unable to protect hisown interests. If the
plaintiff is not thus 4ipcapacitated, then
the next friends have no standing in
COURT ~ 15TSi:a ~
Mr. Streeter quoted authority in sup
port of this position and declared:
1T is entirely in the discretion of the
court to decide whether a next friend
suit shall be allowed to proceed, and in
deciding this question the court shall be
guided by the best interests of the in
competent person in whose name the
suit is brought"
A decision by Judge Putnam of the
federal court of this jurisdiction was cit
ed upon this point.
THE person volunteering to bring
suit as next friend does so at his own
risk and must be prepared to defend and
vindicate the necessity and propriety of
the proceeding at any time when called
upon as they are now called upon" said
Mr.. Streeter ~fL
Mr.. Kelly of counsel for the plaintiffs
interposed that Mr.. Streeter had not so
challenged the good faith of the next
friend in any motion or answer filed by
him on this suit
Mr.. Streeter replied that he was laying
down a general principle of law applica-
BILE to this case and quoting his legal
authority.