Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1910-02-21
BR0WN-BRADLEY
WILL CASE TODAY
Preliminary Sparring to Secure a
Jury Feature of Opening
Session.
CHILDREN ARE NOT PRESENT.
Array of Wcllknown Legal Lights on
Both sides Present in Court
Room This Morning.

The preliminary steps In the action
by which Mrs. Anna NJ Bradley seeks
to have her two children, claimed by
her to be the offspring OF the late
Arthur L. Brown, declared legal and
equal heirs In the division of the prop
erty of the late ex-senator with his
other children. were taken In Judge Nor
ris l.. Rltchie's division of the Third
district court In this city this morning.
Representing Mrs. Bradley and her
children Judge Powers and Judge Mar
rioneaux appeared. For the heirs of
Arthur !. Brown, headed by Max
Brown. son of the late senator. Judge
William II. King of this city and
Caesar Robinson. an attorney OF Den
Yer. were present.
During the proceedings this morning,
which were centered about the securing
OF a jury to try the case. the Bradley
children did not appear. Mrs. Bradley.
their mother, was present. however, oc-
cupying a seat near her counsel Mrs.
Bradley was attired In black. with a
black veil drawn over her face. AS
she appeared in the courtroom II was
noticed that her right arm hung in a
sling. with the arm heavily bandaged.
as though the arm had been broken
OF seriously injured Her other hand
small. smooth and white, but devoid
OF rings or iewlery, WAS free, however.
and she appeared otherwise in perfect
health.
The suit is brought to break what
purportS to be the last will and tesla
ment of the late Arthur L. Brown by
Mrs. Mary Madison. guardian ad Item
of the Bradley children-Arthur Brown
nd 10
Bradley. The property involved is var
iously estimated at between $4,000 and
S150.000. The children of Brown. who
are opposing the action arc Max
Brown, son, and Alice Brown. daughter
of the late ex-senator. II the action
to break the will is successful. the
Bradley children will inherit anywhere
from $4,000 to $4,000. That the action
Is to be closely contested was evident
from the care and elaboration with
which every step In the proceeding
this morning was marked. and in which
every point was hammered out before
either side to the controversy would
Yield.
PLEA OF PLAINTIFF.
-The wifi Is ddted Aug. "A. 1906. and
will be attacked on the ground that the
testator was intoxicated when II was
drawn, and therefore not capable or
making will. In the will Brown dis
nvowed the paternity of the Bradley
children Mrs. Bradley will attempt to
show that the will was obtained by un-
due influence eXerted upon the late
senator against the two Bradley chill
dren, and 1t will be asked that the let
ters testamentary heretofore issued
to Max Brown be revoked and the will
declared void and that the Bradley chill
dren be admitted as equal heirs In the
estate.
Relations between Brown and Mrs.
Bradley continued during a period of
nine years. from 1895 to 1906, on Dec.
8 of the last named year Mrs. Bradley
shot and mortSlly wounded the senator
at Washington, d. c. The result of
the case hinges upon the paternity OF
the children, and the mental condition
of Senator Brown when he made the
will.
In his examination OF the talcsmen
this morning, Judge Powers. for the
Bradley children, laid particular stress
upon the fact that one of the great
points at issue was the parentGgs OF
the bradley children, and his questions
were directed towards ascertaininS
whether the jurors had any bias
against children not born In wedlock.
but whose parentage was acknowl-
edged. Another question upon which
minute examination -.aS made. vas as
to whether the prospective jurors
thought that tho law in this state pro-
viding that where children were so born
and Acknowledged should be equal heirs
with children born In wedlock was a
lust law. most Of those examined re-
spending that they believed 1t TO b.
good law
TALESMEN EXAMINED.
The talesmen examined this morning
were as follows: Hampden s. Beatty.
salesman. H. c. NJ l.: Christian Ber-
ger, farmer. Salt Lake county; Will
liam r. Ashby. dry goods dealer. salt
Lake City. David Archibald, farmer.
Kamas Joseph f. Davis, Ice cream
dealer. Salt Lake city; Louis Bateman,
plumber Salt Lake City, and Henry
Johnson, real estate dealer, Salt Lake
City. Mr.. Ashby was challenged for
cause by counsel for Mrs. Bradley; the
challenge was resisted by Judge King,
hut the Juror was excused by the court
for bias. The examination OF Johnson
occupied the time OF the court at the
time of adjournment. Johnson said
he would take the signed and wilt
messed document purporting to be the
last will and testament of man as
such, IL II were SHOWN that IL was
made by him and witnessed by COM
petent men. Hc was challenged by
Judge Powers and Judge King resist
ed the challenge.
Judge Ritchie took a hand and tried
to get some satisfaction from the tales
man as to his true state of mind on
the question as to whether he would
consider evidence tending to show the
person making the will were intoxicat-
ed with the same weight with that
presented by the will itself Mr. john
son remained obduratc, and the judge
adjourned court in order to go over the
record with counsel In order To deter
mine, il possible, what should be done
In the matter Josiah Burrows and
Oliver I1odgson We're not examined
this morning but arc on the jury
panel.
on account of the fact that Judge
Powers had case in the supreme
court this afternoon and that tomor-
row Is a legal holiday. the further
hearing of the Bradley Brown case
was postponed until Wednesday morn
,l..