The Press., 1915-03-03
TOUCHING A
 CONSCIENCE How a Crime Was Robbed
 of Its Reward.
By EUNICE BLAKE

David Herrick and his wife had nc children. and as they were growing old they decided to adopt some one tC be with them while they lived and to enjoy after their death snug prop erty they had accumulated. There were two persons from whom they were dis posed to select this companion and heir, the one Julia Andrews. the daugh- ter of a sister of Mir. Herrick; the oth. CT Kate Armitage. girl who had at times been employed by them for va rious purposes.
 Mrs. Herrick let out the secret of their intention to a friend who told it to Kate Armitage. The consequence was that when Julia Andrews was chosen Kate was much chagrined. Quite likely, if she had not received the information given her, this story would never have been written.
 Julia Andrews was a lovely girl very sensitive and high spirited. She en- tered upon her life as companion for her uncle and aunt and resolved to do all she could for their happiness. Not long after she did so a will was made in her favor.
 Kate Armitage found it impossible to relinquish not only the comfortable home, but the fortune, that would have been hers had the decision been in her favor and resolved to make an effort | to oust her successful rival that she might step into her place. When a person is determined to ruin another, | if the work Is properly planned and | without any regard whatever to truth or justice, in many cases the effort will be successful.
 Kate Armitage's first object was to | get possession of a specimen of the handwriting of the girl she was de- sirous of supplanting. She wrote Ju- | lia a note under an assumed name, | taking care even to disguise her hand, telling her pitiful story of sick | mother and lot of starving children and begging her to send her a little pecuniary assistance. Julia inclosed bill in a sympathetic letter and | thought no more about the matter. Not long after this Mrs. Herrick re- ceived an anonymous letter inclosing | one purporting to have been written
 
 was getting very tired waiting for the old couple to die, and she wished they | would hurry up. The letter began My dear" and ended "Your loving Julia" Therefore the identity of the person to whom it had beep written was con- cealed. The person who sent the let | ter-evidently a woman-declared that | she could not bear to see good wom= | an so basely deceived and had there | fore sent her the proof of her nece's | ingratitude.
 Mrs. Herrick was naturally very much shocked. She recognized at once Julia's handwriting, or supposed she did, for she did not know that Kate | Armitage had practiced for weeks imi- | tating it, and it seemed to her that there was no question as to her niece's | guilt. Her husband was not at home then, and she could not wait till he re- | turned to charge Julia with her base | ness. Julia, who did not suppose she had an enemy in the world, was thun- | derstruck. She denied having written the letter, and when her aunt called upon her for proof of the fact, yielding to her sensitive, high strung nature. she walked out of the room, put on her wraps and left the house.
 When Mir. Herrick returned and learned what had occurred he was not so disposed as was his wife to believe in his niece's guilt. He explained to his wife that the law was full of pe- culiar checks that were intended to protect persons accused of crime, not only from false evidence, but from the taking of steps calculated to place them in false positions. He therefore advocated recalling Julia and hearing what she had to say in her defense. His wife opposed this because, sue maintained, Julia had acknowledged her guilt by going away.
 Having failed in their first effort to get some one to be a comfort to them and inherit their property, they decid ed to make another trial in the person of Kate Armitage. She was asked by Mrs. Herrick to a conference which resulted in her being invited to live with the couple on trial. She quickly assented and became a member of the family. She proved more satisfactory than Julia as a helper, because what Julia had done for her aunt and uncle from choice Kate did to make herself solid with those from whom she hoped to inherit a fortune. Nevertheless there is difference between true and false affection which appears at times. for it is different matter for the pretender to keep up the pretense. MT. | int- fa1 hf rso faiI IoI to take any interest in Kate Armitage.
 Kate proving eminently satisfactory to Mrs. Herrick, the old couple decid- ed to make will in her favor. MT. Herrick had accumulated the property. and he willed the property to his wife. who made a will in favor of Kate. The attorney who drew these wills recommended certain restrictions. If Mrs. Herrick should be disabled from making a subsequent will the one she had made must stand. It was there fore possible for Kate to marry, leave her benefactress and yet inherit the property at the latter's death. A clause was therefore introduced into Mrs. Herrick's will that in case Kate mar. ried the will should be void. In such event, there being no will, the property would be distributed among the heirs, at-law.
 MT. Herrick died when Kate had been living with them three years, and his wife followed him six months later. Kate had been told by Mrs. Herrick that she had made will in her favor, but the restriction was not mentioned, After the old lady's death the lawyer who had drawn it and in whose care It had been ever since produced itI and signified to Kate that he had de. posted 1t with the surrogate. She had only to go to that official to sign the necessary documents and receive her inheritance.
 It is not to be assumed from this narrative that Kate Armitage was a l
 AY A L A<,f