Jasper County Democrat, Volume 6, Number 35, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 December 1903 — SPENCER WILL CASE. [ARTICLE]

SPENCER WILL CASE.

Issues Made Up and Case Set for Feb. 13. --History of the Case. Judge Joseph M. Rabb of Williamsport, oooupied the benoh iu oar court Monday and Tuesday, hearing motions and argument of the attorneys in the famous Dr. William Spencer will case, brought here from White county on a change of venue. Charles C. Spencer and Capt. Guthrie of Monticello, and Judge Winfield of Logansport, represented the plaintiff. Dr. Frank Spencer and E. B. Sellers, W. E. Uhl and B. F. Carr of Montioello, DeWitt Justic of Loganspott, Ferguson & Wilson and Foltz, Spitler & Eurrie of Rensselaer, represent the defendants, namely, Mrs. Gertrude Meeker and Mrs. May Carson and their husbands. The plaintiff’s complaint is very long and goes at length into specific charges of conspiracy and fraud on the part of the defendants in procuring Dr. Spencer to execute the will which reads as follows: , “Montioello, May 2nd, 1898. I, William Spencer, being of sound mind and disposing mind and memory, do make this as my last will and testament. Ist—l give to my daughter. Mrs May Carson, all my property both personal and real of whatsoever kind to be hers and her heirs forever. Jnd—l give to my only other sUM. Mrs. Gertrude Meeker, in addition to what she has already obtained from me, an additional sum of ten dollars. Wm. Spsmcsb. Witnesses: A. P. Reynolds, B. F. Ritchie.” The plaintiff charges that Dr. Spencer had two wills, one made in March, 1892, drafted by E. B. Sellers, and the above will now in contest, which he drafted with hia own hand; that in 1895 his son-in-law, S. A. Carson, drafted a deed conveying all the property of the testator to Mrs. Carson, his wife, and got him to sign it, and this deed was keep off record until testator’s death; that the defendants conspired to cheat and defrand the plaintiff, who was adopted by the testator, out of his Share, by getting the testator to exeente the above wills and deed, and to that end he charged and argned to the court that the defendants were suppressing the first will andwhile admitting its possession refused to allow plaintiff to inspect it as well as other papers signed by the testator. Judge Rabb entered an order requiring the defendants to file the March will—the one being concealed by the defendants—with the clerk of the court by Saturday of this week, and also entered an order requiring the defendants to answer certain questions concerning the estate and conspiracy, which they had refused on examination before a notary to answer. Tbe case is set for trial on February 15. and it promises to be an interesting one from the facts charged, and the array of counsel and the prominence of the parties and the amount at stake. Tbe Indianapolis Journal of Tuesday published the following account of the case:

Bsumelaer. Ind,, Nov. 30.—The issues in the Dr. William Spencer will oase were made up today in tbe Circuit Court before Judge Joseph M. Rabb of Williamsport. Dr. Frank Spencer, now taking his second year postgraduate work in the Medical College at Ann Arbor, Mioh., is contesting the will of Dr, William Spencer, who died about two year* ago at his home in Montioello, where he owned property valued at 1100,000. The complaint charges that in 1880 Dr. Wm. Spencer married plaintiff’s mother who was at that time the widow of Dr. Spencer's brother, and that as an inducement to the marriage the testator promised and agreed to adopt the plaintiff and give him one-third of bis estate, representing that he was a weakly child, and needed his care as a physician, and unless he got it he would die; that on the faith of this and many other promises the wife married the testator, and gave him about $6,000 with which to build their home: that a few weeks after the marriage the testator duly adopted the plaintiff, but from that moment the testator's other children, two daughters. Mrs. Carson and Mrs. Meeker, prominent in Monticello social circles, began to poison the mind of Dr. Spencer against his new wife and adopted son and nephew, to the extent that he entertained various delusions as to his oonduot and duty towaid bis family; that about 1887 hia weakness of mind and body, resulting from various causes charged, became manifest and caused a change in his attitude toward and treatment of his family, growing worse until 189$, when it became so unbearable that his wife was compelled to procure a divorce on a complaint of oruel and Inhuman treatment, which was sustained by the White circuit court; that during this trial the testater executed a will, and two months later personally drafted the will now being contested, which gives all his property to Mrs. Carson, wife of the cashier of the Monticello National Bank, and 110 to hit other daughter, Mrs. Meeker, whose husband owns the prinoipal drug store, and lumber and coal business In that town; the will does not even mention the plaintiff, and the plaintiff says in his complaint that in pursuance of the conspiracy of the defendants to cheat him out of his Interests, they procured by undue influence and fraud the two wills to be executed, and also In 188 S a deed to be exeouted by the testator conveying all his property to Mrs. Carson, which deed was kept off of record until after tbe testator’s death, when the same was recorded, together with another deed from Mrs. Carson to Mrs. Meeker for her half of the property, which had been previously agreed upon as her share by the two defendants; that owing to the testator’s unsoundness of mind the defendants dominated him and procured the execution of these instruments, as well as obtaining from him many thousand dollars in money and property. This suit has been pending for more that a year. The plaintiff has filed about a dosen depositions and examinations, including the deposition of the only surviving subscribing witness to tbe will, who testifies that the testator was of unsound mind at the time of the execution of the will. To the same point are the depositions of the uncle of the testator, clerks 1a hia store and others closely associated with him. The plaintiff examined the defendants and their husbands, as to their knowledge of and connection with the will and deed, and for failure to answer most of the questions the plaintiff today asked the court for an order compelling the defendants to answer these questions. The case probably will be tried at the next term of this court, and from indications and reports will take about a mouth.