The Bennington evening banner. (Bennington, Vt.) 19??-1961, 1921-07-12
.sTILLMAN GAINS !
| POINT IN RULINGS
sss '. "a
Vermont state Library
4 l 2OseptlS
ts1f *swh Ma ~ vi
Alleged Letters of Indian Guide
Beauvis Admitted in Evidence
AFFECTS CHILD'S STATUS
Baby Guy May Lose Right to
Share in $7,OOO,OOO
Trust Fund H
AFFECTS CHILD'S STATUS

iOubhhScPSic, Juiy - n ScIlcS Vi
rulings handed down yesterday by
Referee Daniel ]. Gleason provides at
least q temporary victory for James
"a stillman by admitting In evidence
the two alleged Beauvais letters over
the objections of Mrs. stlllmans at
torneys. The referee admitted also
tie telephone conversation which
Mrs. Percy A. Rockefeller the bank,
Iers sister, said she had with Mrs.
Stillman in February, 1918, the only
point In favor OF Mrs Stillman and
Baby Guy in the days developments
being found in the wording OF the de-
cision relating to the letters, which
states that all reference to t,'r ch Ids
parentage contained In them is ruled
oG'.
Mr. Gleason's decision In substance
holds that so far as the bankers side
OF the suit is concerned he has proved
his charges against Mrs. Stillman and
has established tat he and his wife
were not living together during the
spring of 1918, point which, If not
upset by the defense, jeopardizes
Guys right to the name of Stillman,
as we'll as his right to benefit from
the $7000,OO0 trust fund established
by his grandfather. In making the
ruling regarding the letters Referee
Gleason has reversed himself COM
pletelg. arf 7rr'f@ hf
|-..'.
Rulings Cover Seven Points
So far as the referee is concerned
the rulings are final Any attempt to
have them set aside must be made In
an appeal to the Appellate Division
OF the Supreme Court.
The rulings were on the seven
points OF law raised by William Rand
OF Mr.. Stillman counsel at the hear
ing held here week ago last Friday.
The points were based on evidence
already submitted in Mr.. Stillman's
behalf and concerned the most vital
part Of the testimony.
The letters whiC'l the rulings coti'
Germ are the famous exhibits Known
during theb hearings on MRS ! Stiiii
counsel fees last March, as B 'dhd c.
Since being brought into the referees
hearings they have been renamed ex''
hbts 10 and 1S-A Qetter) and lS-B
(enyelopel. 2 $685. ! J. -
In his decision Mr.. Gleason refers
to exhibit ~ as letter OF Beauvais
written IN May, 1919, and describes 1t
as having been offered in evidence as
indicating a d dsposition on the part
of Mrs. Stillman and the guide 70 be-
intimate From this offer upon the
issue of legitimacy is excluded any
direct or indirect declaration by
Beauvais as to the pattern ty of the
infant" the ruling reads, and ike
restriction was placed on what Is TO
be drawn from the second missiye.
Hard slowtto Defence ns'!i3A1'
Referee Gleaso1's fuiing tssatdIHg
i've nrst alleged Beaptals letter holds
mat il Ia admissible, because Mrs,
Stillman reta ned II In her possession
after the alleged receipt and ,acRno%-,
ledgnient by Yer Of the second letter
and also becahse She retained the
moceasins which. servants testify,
we're the GIT OF the guide to Guy .,s,
The admission Of t1a alleged teiei
phone conversation between Mrs. :.
stillman Is another blow to the de-.
fense Other sections Of the decision
in which nine points are raised and
in which the attorneys of Mr.. Still
man are sustained In all but two, deal
with direct declarations alleged TO
been made by Mrs. Stllman regarding
GUY. which have been withdrawminre re
gard to the infant, and the part OF the
testimony of DR.. Hugh l.. Russell OF
Buffalo, which has been stricken from
tNi record.