A ROMANCE OF THE COURTS speaking through the great justice Davis, in affirming the decision just quoted from, said: "To the discredit of the friends of Daniel Clark, this child grew to womanhood in utter ignorance of her rights and parent age, and did not ascertain them until 1834, (then not fully), since which time she has been endeavoring to obtain her rightful in heritance. Owing to the length of time, it was difficult to reach the truth, and neces sarily for many years she groped her way in darkness; but finally she was able to show the great fraud perpetrated against her, for in the judgment of the Supreme Court of Louisiana she established the validity of that very will which, forty-three years be fore, her father had executed in her favor. . . . The questions of law and fact applica ble to those rights were determined in the case of Gaines v. Hennen. After argument of able counsel, and on mature considera tion, we have re-affirmed that decision. Can we not hope that the rights of Myra Clark Gaines in the estate of her father, Daniel Clark, will now be recognized?" That hope was disappointed, for in 1869, suit was commenced against Mrs. Gaines in the Court of Probate of New Orleans, by that city, and seventy-four individual suitors, to revoke the will of 1813, and rees tablish that of 1811. Mrs. Gaines' appli cation to transfer the controversy to the Federal Circuit Court was denied, and in December, 1871, a decree was rendered against her in the Court of Probate, declar ing such revocation. That decree was affirmed by the Louisiana Supreme Court, in an elaborate opinion, in 1873. But that decision was reversed by -the Supreme Court of the United States in 1876, and in April, 1877, a final decree was rendered in the Fed eral Circuit Court for the District of Lou isiana, to the effect that the will of 1813 was duly probated in 1855 upon veritable testimony. That question was then finally laid at rest. It is not the purpose of this narrative
93
to marshal details of this extraordinary litigation. Before it was definitely closed, ere that woman of indomitable will had realized the material fruits of repeated victories in the courts of her country, her tireless spirit was arrested in its course. Two million dollars, nearly, was the amount of a judg ment rendered in favor of Mrs. Gaines in the United States Circuit Court, in Louisi ana, against the city of New Orleans, in May, 1883. The case, as a matter of course, was appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States. There, six years later, the judgment was reduced to something less than six hundred thousand dollars. In that decision, it was said, through Bradley Justice, whilst adhering to former deci sions affirming the claims of Mrs. Gaines, that "the evidence to sustain them was so full of obscurities and improbabilities that a possessor of land purchased from the rep resentatives of Daniel Clark could not be blamed for not giving it credence, and for resisting her suits to the utmost," thus indicating that the margin of success had been dubious, after all. On the Qth day of January, 1885, while on a visit to New Orleans, the city of her birth, Myra Clark Gaines was summoned by that invincible bailiff to that undiscov ered jurisdiction where the law's delays are presumably unknown; where neither writs of error, nor appeals, nor petitions for re hearing are granted. Alas! who is able to conjecture the irony of fate? A few days after Mrs. Gaines' death, an olographic will, dated January 8, 1885, purporting to have been "writtten, dated, and signed" by Myra Clark Gaines, was presented for probate in the proper court at New Orleans. On the same day, a will dated January 5, 1885, formally witnessed as that of Myra Clark Gaines, was proffered for probate in the same court. The propo nents of the alleged will first filed contested the other, upon the ground that it was superseded by that bearing the later date; on the other hand, the paper first filed was
