Rensselaer Union, Volume 7, Number 32, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 29 April 1875 — A Romantic Will Case. [ARTICLE]

A Romantic Will Case.

With a little dressing up, a will cast which recently came before the Surrogate or Probate Judge of Nsw York city might be made the basis of an exciting romance. In 1872 Miss Susan A. Lawrence, a rich young lady of New York, secretly married John A. Baker, a lawyer by profession, and a native of North Carolina. Baker had been previously married to a Miss Herein, of Chicago, whom he abandoned, and from whom he afterward procored a divorce on a trumped-up charge against her. He was a plausible fellow, and, assisted by Eliza Brown, a female relative, succeeded in inducing Miss Lawrence to many him clandestinely. Her family disikea Baker, deeming him unworthy of her, and the integrity of her character was such that no one who knew her could believe that she would have consented to the step unless undpr deceptive representations. There was *videnc'e that these had been brought to bear upon her through llie woman Brown, who convinced her that Baker's first divorce was perfectly legitimate. The unfortunate young lady fen into the trap, and went South with Baker early in 1878 without letting the fact of the marriage be known. She died without children in 1874 at Charleston, S. C. She made a will in which she left her husband an annuity of $1,500 for life. The small amount of this bequest appeared to show quite plainly that she had not much confidence in him, but her relatives would not suffer him to keep even the $1,500. They alleged that undue influence had been used to secure it, and the Surrogate ruled in their favor. He said: “ In the present case we have evidence which shows conclusively to my mind that the legatee, John A. B..ker, had sufficient influence to induce a refined and sensitive woman, to whom a violation of the conventional proprieties of life was evidently repugnant, to consent to a marriage in opposition to the wishes of her family, who believed him unworthy of her, and to a marriage in secret—always an act done with regret, and seldom by a woman of the character and social position of the decedent—except impelled by a passion which would consent to any sacrifice for the object of her. love. And his influence was sufficient, after the marriage had been kept secret for months from her family, to whom she was fondly attached, to consent to clandestinely leave the protection of the household with the man who had inspired and fostered the passion, to go to * distant State and accept his doubtful protection instead. An influence sufficient to accomplish these results is equal to procuring the execution of a testamentary instrument from the decedent which would give the chief actor a life interest in a portion of her estate, and this I hold to have been affirmatively proven in this case; and certainly the one most interested in sustaining the instrument has failed to convince me, as under the law he should do, in view of his relations with the decedent and of all the facts and circumstances which have been developed in the proofs, that no sinister means were used by him to secure the bequests in his favor.” This decision is no doubt in accordance with the law and the facts in the case, and it is certainly in the direction of poetic instinct. The novelist would, however, provide some deserving heir or heiress whose inheritance of the fortune would bring about a happy marriage, thus affording a pleasant relief to the dark picture of thwarted villainy. —Cincinnati Gazette.