Show The Searles Will Contest SALEM Mass Sept 23 The second day of the Searles will case opened with a big crowd present The examination of Mr Searles was continued Witness and his wife went to Europe November 23 1887 on a wedding tour Previous to starting on the wedding tour Mrs Searles secured funds about 100000 The trip was for six months and included witness his wife a ladys maid and Rev Dr Clapp his wife and daughter He did not meet Dr Slado or any spiritualists on that trip knew Charles Bolles who he believed called himself him-self a harmony scholar or Christian scientist sci-entist but he never knew of his attending Mrs Searles either before or after his marriage Timothy Hopkins managed Mrs Searles affairs up to the time of the partnership After his marriage while in Europe witness wife made over to him certain deeds at Nice The suggestion of a co partnership came from Mrs Searles Articles Arti-cles of co partnership were put inevidence Mary F Searles Edward F LS i arles Thomas E Stillman and Thomas Hubbard were appointed to manage all the property of Searles and to pay the income in-come to the parties Mr and Mrs Searles to receive 45 per cent each and Stillman Hubbard each 5 per cent of the income if it did not amount to 550000 to be brought up to that amount by the sale of securities Mrs Hopkins became acquainted ac-quainted with Stillman Hubbard about a year before ber marriage and on October 1SS7 Stillman was given a power of at torney from Mr Searles and Mrs Hopkins There was also a general power of attorney from Mrs Hopkins to Stillman Hubbard dated November 8 1887 This was the same date as the marriage with I supplementary certification after marriage This was never revoked to the knowledge of witness Witness knew of the transfer of stock standing in her name to the firm a few days before her death Witness saw her attorneys in New York five days before and told them her condition was critical He did not learn that the transfer had been made until after her death He could not say what the stocks were or their value and did not know hew and never knew what the assets of the copartnership were never heard the amount stated Witness share of the income from the firm was 45 per cent but he drew both his and his wifes income and at her request used the money to pay general household expenses Witness deposited de-posited the money to his individual account and drew checks against it Burleigh called for the checkbook Witness continued Mrs Searles had contnued no individual book account ac-count during the time they lived together He could not give the average annual prof its of the copartnership but it was be tween 500000 and 600000 At the afternoon session another power of attorney was put in evidence dated July 1 18S8 from Mary O Searles to Thomas F Stillman and Thomas Hubbard This was a general power of attorney and con tined a declaration that as it was coupled with an interest thereon it was irrevocable A trans fer was put in dated June 18 1688 from Mary F Searles to Thomas JB Sti 188 man of various railroad stocks and a note of the Pacific Investment company for 7500000 and 20750 shares of Central Pacific Pa-cific railroad stock the aggregate amounting to 36000000 and this Stillman in turn transferred to P F Searles and he in turn transferred at together with 1400 shares of Washing ton Building association stock 140000 in scrip of the company and 1000 shares of United States bank stock which he had received re-ceived from his wife in trust to the firm of Seares Stillman Hubbard Objection Objec-tion was made to a question to Mr Scenes What did your private estate consist of at the time of your marriage An ad journment was made to tomorrow morn Ing |