A STRANGE CASE.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume 17, Issue 1066, 12 July 1871, Page 2

A STRANGE CASE.

The Melbourne Age of a late date reports the following strange case :—" The matters of Mr Thomas Graham, deceased, the wealthy brewer, we A e again before the Equity Court yesterday, in its ecclesiastical jurisdiction. Mr Graham left a fortune of over ,£30,000. Mrs Graham applied for administration, but a caveat was lodged against the application by her daughter, Mrs Cozens. The ground of the caveat was the very surprising one that. Mrs Graham had a husband living in Tasmania when she married Graham. Mrs Cozens is her daughter by the former husband, whose name was Crook. She stated in an affidavit that Crook lived several years, as a after his wife's marriage with GrabanW Afterwards another caveat was lodged, under still more extraordinary circumstances. Mr Charsley, the solicitor, lodged this caveat. He produced a letter to Mr Graham from two brothers named Graham in England and explained it by the following ailege4 facts :—Mr Graham had a wife livioo- in England at the time of his marriage with Mrs Graham formerly Crook. The former marriage was contracted oyer forty years ago, but IVTr Graham deserted his wife, and came to this country. He had two sons by his first marriage, but never made known bis whereabouts to them until after the lapse of a period of tinje during which they grew from children to men of mature age. Within a few of his death Mr Graham wrote a lettet addressed at random to his sons in England, the only direction being that of the place where he had left them so manyyears before. No copy can be found among Mr Graham's paper of the letter which he sent Home, and its contents are only to be gathered from the reply of his sons. They stated in the letter that they were both married men, that they were in poor circumstances, and thaj; they felt very grateful to their father for making himself known to them. Jt also appeared from the letter that Mr Graham had told them he was the possessor of a large fortune, and would make good provision for. them in his will. The interference of Mr Cbarsley was accounted for by the fact that the brothers had placed tha matter in the hands of an English solicitor, who appointed him as agent. Tha caveat by Mrs Cozens was withdrawn last week, and it was hinted in court yesterday that there had been an arrangement with her. The strange circumstances in connection with the case are not exhausted by the narration which has been given. It is stated that Mr Graham married the mother of the brothers Graham at Home in the year 1820, and she did not die until the year 1860. It is also stated that in the year 1829 he married another, woman, with whom he embarked fox Australia several years afterwards. There were 590 passengers on beard the ship which was wrecked, and only abuut 4Q, escaped alive, Mr Graham being among them, with a stepson of the wife he had with him. The wife was drowned together with two children of hers by Mr Graham. Iu 1840 Graham married Mrs Crook. Here now is a wonderfu} story giving a fresh illustration of the saying that truth is stranger than fiction. The case came before the Equity Court yesterday, on an application by Mr Stephen on behalf of Mrs Graham, for administration to the real and personal estate of her late husband. Mr Bunny, on behalf of Mr Charsley, opposed the application. Me Stephen's hypothesis was that the sons who wrote from Home were illegitimate children; j\lr Bunny's that they were legitimate, and that the woman lost in the ship was not Mr Graham's wife. After hearing both gentlemen, Mr Justice Moiesworth reserved his decision."