Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 21, Number 86, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 July 1900 — The Jockey Smith Will Case. [ARTICLE]

The Jockey Smith Will Case.

Renton Review. ; “Jockey” Smith owned all the land around and about where Beavei City in Newton county, now Stands. “Jockey” wjas a very eccentric individual but he knew how to make money all right and captured all the good land in sight. There was a fellow by the name of Duclos paying some attention to one of his four daughters, and when Smith made his will in 1878 lie gave his daughter 180 acres of land but put in a proviso that would take the whole thing away from her if she marijed Duclos. Smith died in 1889. He undoubtedly left a will, but the only one who seemed to know anything about it was tbd oldest son Nathan G. Jr. who lived in South Dakota. After his father’s death he wrote to relatives telliug them to institute a search for the will, but it was never found until last September and then it was in the hands of the administrator T>f the estate one She’don Smith a father-in-law of Nathan G. Jr. An action was then brought by Nathan G. in the Newton circuit court to the effect that the will be produced by the administrator aud admitted to probate. The Philip sided with his brother. The Sisters claimed the will was void as it bpre no date, that it has been revoked by a conveyance or part of the land by ‘‘Jockey” after it was executed and the daughters claimed their father was of unsound mind. The cash came off before Special Judge Dwiggins of Rensselaer and the plaintiff won and the will was admitted to probate. In the meantime the administrator had settled the estate apd the land had been partitioned attfoug the children as though there was no will in existence. The present action is brought by Nathan G. Jr., and his brother Philip to set aside the partition proceedings and re-apportion the estate. They claim that the sister by marrying Duclos is entitled to nothing, aud they want part of her land. The sisters are arrayed against the brothers again. The evidence in the case was heard last Thursday and Friday morning Judge Rabb made a decision that leaves the estate where it was before the will was probated. Further investigation seems to indicate that “Jockey,” made the will but never intended that it should operate, as he had treated it as if of no value, had conveyed part of the land devised in the will after execution, and seemed to think the will had been destroyed. In the present case Nathan G. Smith Jr. claimed that the will had been fraudulently concealed and suppressed by the sisters and the administrator. Sheldon Smith, but the evidence as to fraud was weak. About 1120 acres of land worth about $70,000 was involved in this suit v