The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1907-03-09

and deliver the deed In question; that
the same was duly delivered on or about
the said llth day OF June. 1904. TO the
defendant l-eavitt by said Cora Birdsall
that at the time of the execution and de
livery OF said deed no undue influence
was exercised or used in any manner
nor was there any fraud or coercion prac-
ticed by anyone: that since the execu
ton OF said deed. to wt, on or about
August 3, 1905, said Cora Birdsall was
duly adjudged TO be insane and was COM
mitted to the State Mental hospital ar
Provo Utah, for treatment and care.
Upon substantially the foregoing ind
that the defendants were entitled TO &
judgment for mo cause OF action" and
entered judgment accordingly against
plaintiff, from which this appeal is prose-
cuted.
Views Of Supreme Court.
The assessments OF error are numerous
and stated In various forms. II is sufh-
cient TO say that they attack the findings
and judgment, without specifying them
separately. careful perusal of the evil
but one conclusion, which is that the
tanned.
The evidence is quite volumlnous. and
TO set II out would require too much
space. We will therefore content our
selves by a brief statement of what we
quoting from the evidence only as much
as will illustrate some particular fact
or facts. The physician who treated Cora
Blrdsall was called as a witness and tes-
tined as an expert from what he learned
from personal observation Of his patient.
He, in substance, testified that Cora
Birdsall suffered from q mental break
down; that her mental disease was here
ditary, and that 1t had been In progress
for at least a number OF years prior to
the time the deed was signed and was
that she. AT that time In his Judgment
was mentally incompetent and wholly in
capacitated from making a deed, Her
reiatives testified to substantially the
on actual observation and contact with
Miss Birdsall. They described her con-
duct and department. all OF which clear
ly tended to show that she was irrational
and had been In such condition for a long
Time prior 10 the making OF the deed
worse al times. better at other times
There is no evidence against this: except
the conclusions OF some OF her neighbors,
none OF whom giving any specific data on
which their conclusions are based, and
being non-experts: their testimony Is thus
entitled 10 but little. IL any, weight, re-
gardless of their good motives veracity.
The clear weight Of the evidence. i'm
view OF the fact that Cora Birdsal was
from an hereditary mental dis
ease which in the following year culmin-
ated in her entire mental breakdown and
caused her TO be adiudsed insane and
placd IN a mental hospital, where she
remains, is TO the effect that she. at the
time she executed the deed. was men
tally incapacitated and therefore incom-
petent TO make the same.
Elders Coerce Her.
1t. however, further appears without
and from the witnesses tcs-
'lfying Ola behalf OF the defendants, that
Cora Birdsall did not make the deed of
her own free will. The matter leading up
to the making of the deed was long
drawn out affair. and had gone through
about all OF the so-called church courts
all Of which had decided against her, and
finally upon her refusal TO comply with
the decision Of the church authorities.
she was communicated or dlsfellow-
shipped and thereby lost her member
ship and standing In the church.
IL is manifest from this record that 1T
was for the purpose Of her reconciliation
with and TO regain her standing in the
church that she signed this deed. To
bring about this, bishops and elders were
called in 10 administer to both her spirit
Ial and physical wants, as they all de
clare: and to gain the object in view they
all ELECTED and advised, some OF them
even importuned. her to sign the deed
The KEY TO the whole situation as it
really existed is best stated in a few
words from witness for the defense,
Simon Christensen. who says
Il was present when the deed in ques-
lion was signed Those present were
Bean. John w. Coons, Bishop
sen and Morten Jensen were there. and
Cora and Mrs Taylor. When we
got there she seemed 10 be quite troubled
IN her mind and feeling distressed; she
was expressing herself something like
this Why was ! so foolish as 10 refuse
10 comply with that decision?'
We told her that she need not trouble !
herself so much about that. that if she
wished To comply with that decision now
she had the privilege, and by doing so
size could gain her fellowship in the
church And during our CONVEX
sa,ion, someone-lt may have been me
made the statement, III YOU think more
n that land than you do Of your standing
In the church. that, Of course. VIII make |
1 difference. TO which she answered en-
i care nothing for the land. |
only that l may get 10 feel as | did be- |
'ore "