The sun., 1916-01-25
FACTS IN
The CHAPMAN CASE
No Blame Attaches to Title
Company or to Clarence II.
Kelsey. It's Head.
GUARDIANSHIP DECLINED

Tho latest development in the ease ~
the old actor. IIawlcy Chapman. vino has
been a patient in u sanitarium Tor many
years. IL the refusal OF the Kings
County Trust Company 10 accep, the
guardianship Of Chapman, to which IL
was appointed by Justice Manning
knowledge Of line history of the case Is
said to have caused the trust company
to decline the appointment. which throws
the selection Of "A proper guardian back
once more into the hands of the court
In connection with the new turn Of
the case THE StS wishes to make clea Z
that any unfavorable impression as 10
! the acts Of the trustees which may have
been conveyed by its original report Of
the findings of former Justice Marcan
as referee winch were made public sew
eral days ago Is III founded
The referee was appointed IN pro-
cc.ding instituted 10y Mrs Ellis. a half
sister Of Chapman. who asked for ihc
| appointment of - guardian tor Chapman.
The referc"s findings did not go into
! the history Of the case. which extends
io>cr a p.ripi Of nearly thirty years.
| The Maican report does not warrant
! any implication of blame attaching either
! to the Title Guarantee anil Trust Com
d
dent. IN the administration of the est
out Of which Chapman is supported. nor
would the record OF facts sustain any
i such implication against the trusteeshii,
which the Title Guarantee and Trust
! Company mas exercised for some si X
! wears.
! Justice Mareans recommendations
! looked toward a change IN legal s!tua-
tiuu which was not brought about by the
: ht,s al,
/ in obedience to court orders they were
required to make certain payments.
| These payments, however. did not and
could no' begin until a long series of
! legal actions by Mre. Louise Ellis look
! ing toward the establishment Of herself
as All heir mad been disposed OF
/ The essential facts are dealt with IN
! IN" following statement ny Horace
! Anderson. assistant secretary Of the
| lTrle Guarantee and Trust Company:
! Two days after IN" death ~
Julia A. Chapman. VINO was Hawlcy
! Chapmdu's aunt. Mrs. Louisa Ellis re-.
corded a deed conveying mos; of the
Chapman real estate to her own
I mother who was then dead. Mrs. Elli'
being hcr only heir. Tho courts failed
/ T. sustain tho validity OF this deed. which
! Mrs Ellis could not produce, having
stated that she lost n Mrs. Ellis ais,
made certain claims m connection witt
an alleged agreement Of Julia \
q chapman agreeing to ledv" her oUc-hall
! lor estate 10y her will This al. like.
wjs" failed 10 substantiatc. nor could sh,
/ produce the alleged agreement as II alsC
I WAS lost. Mrs Ellis also has bruugh; 4
court proceeding TO divert tho funds 81
| tire estate toward the payment uf i.
! Judgment Sh" has against lIawloy thap
! man. ldIt the courts haN" refused - Al,
I low This "n the ground that TIA. fuud'
ibid not belong to creators of IlaWl.y
, ,'Napmtu
"Durtng these wears Of liiigt,io,
/ sll ,UOo % income had n,"u accumulated
under tn. care Of the executor. but Ina,
not ve, been turned oyer 20 The trustee
! and during This same period The car,
and suplrnrt ~ lIawlcy Chapman Ia,
been also directed hy ~" executor
when this fund OF sll,0o0 was turun,
over to IN" r.t'c Guarantee a.d Tru~
Company us trustee th, comrtuy app',,,
T., the SIrrog ttc for a direction as to ?
.dt-trthuj.uu and the fund Nts dis
'r.putud o., url,~ ui Ia" SURROGATE, ar
,nr.l.us fp t.,. directions contained !,. IN.
wills ~ thtp putl'- up'A"r and aunt. ant
B. was uursBaU' to thcsr cypress dIrcc
tfous that uu'-'wcHtN- fourth of his ac
.umu.atiou WAS paid to Mr.. Kelsey per
SouallN. such payment Was not onll
Lawful sui proper hu' cnglh not b,
avoided ana warrants no criticism OF IN,
truStc" or - officers.
'TIo impression has been given tha
IN. income of tive estate is largo and tina
"rly a very small portion - L is dc
voted To- Nj ChtpWau's support As .
matter Of fa,' tn" property consist,