The Waugh Case

THE WAUGH CASE

Judge Newkirk Rendered His Deci-

sion on It

The claim of William J. Webster vs.

the estate of James Waugh of York,

about which there has been so much

litigation and contest, was this morn-

ing allowed by Judge of Probate New-

kirk at $975 for 13 years' labor at $75

a year and $106.81 taxes paid making

a total of $1,081.81. The story of the

case which was first tried in the cir-

cuit court has been told at length in the

columns of the Daily Argus. The

basis of the claim of William J. Web-

ster was the contract he held with

James Waugh, deceased, that if he

worked for and took care of Waugh

and wife until their death he was to

receive certain property. In the first suit

on this contract, the supreme court

held that as the contract was not

signed by Mrs. Waugh it could not be

specifically enforced, but intimated that

the plaintiff could recover for his

work and labor. Attorney E. B.

Norris in a very able argument under-

took to show that the agreement in

the first place being void, it could not

be construed in any way so as to pay

the claimant for his work. and if he

should be paid, such claim was out-

lawed.

Judge Newkirk only allowed for 13 years'

services cutting off seven years'

services done during the life of Mrs.

Waugh who survived her husband. As

was stated in the Argus, the deceased

Waugh once filed a bill against a son

who had a similar contract to take care

of his parent to return the parents'

property, he not doing his duty. This

son would be one of the heirs to be

benefitted if the Webster claim should

be defeated. Randall &. Jones for

Webster, and E. B. Norris for the heirs.