Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 22, Number 4, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 2 October 1900 — The Circuit Court. [ARTICLE]

The Circuit Court.

The suit of Mrs. Anna Mocsmiller, Mrs. Lena Riddle and others to break or modify the will of their father, the late Joseph Putts Sr. was one of the hardest contested trials of the term. Mr. Putts lived on a farm 24 miles south of Rensselaer, his son, Joseph Putts Jr. and wife working the farm and taking cqre of him. On Sept, 21st 1898, he had a paralytic stroke. Nine days later he made a will. To his son George he gave SBOO to his daughter Mrs. Riddle S3OO aud to his other daughter Mrs. Moosmiller SSO and to each of her 6 children SIOO, making $650 in all to the Moosmiilers. To St Augustine’s Catholic church SIOO. and to Joseph Putts Jr. he willed his farm, worth $4,000 to $4,500 less a mortgage of SBOO, and charged him with the payment of all the above legacies, he to have 12 years in which to pay them off, and they to draw 6 per cent, interest until paid. This will, if it had been left to stand, would probably have been fairly satisfactory to the heirs. But on Dec. 13th, 1898, a codicil was made, reducing Geo. Putts’ legacy to SSOO, Mrs. Riddle’s to S2OO and the Moosmiller’s to S4OO and giving Joseph Jr. $650 besides the farm, On June sth 1900, 5 days before his death, another codicil was made. George was reduced to $350, Mrs. Riddle to SSO and the Mossmillers’ to SIOO. The additional bequest to Joe was changed to S6OO to his wife Anna Putts. The SIOO to the church was not changed. The plaintiffs at the trial sought to sho v that after having been stricken with paralysis the old man was incapable of making a valid will. The jury took the view however, that the original will was all right, and they sustained, that in ail particulars, but abrogated all the codicils. The two cases of Severe vs Burgess and Comstock A Son vs; N.J, Reed, sheriff, involved the' question of the right to poss-ss a certain well drilling outfit. The sheriff levied on it, up about Wheatfield, in the s'uit of Severe vs Burgess, to collect a judgement and Comstock A .Son replevined it from him. The two cases were tried together The jury found for the defendant in the first, case, and for the plaintiff in the second, giving Comstock & Son possession of the drilling outfit.