The Enroth Case.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVI, Issue 187, 6 February 1914, Page 6

The Enroth Case.

A TANOLED SKEIS. EUKTHEU DETAILS. DECISION RESERVED. Tho continuation of tlic proceedings in (.lie case between .Mrs. Berridge and the l'ublic Trustee in the Supreme Court at Xew Plymouth yesterday disclosed some further details of Enroth"* lift', and in many respects plunged the case still further into a maze of mystery which surrounds the doings of the man who called himself Enroth. As council for both sides remarked, they had been unable, despite the most diligent search, to find any record of a case exactly similar. The doings of Enroth were without parallel in the annals of law.

During yesterday's proceedings it became apparent that there was some confusion as to the number of wills which Enroth actually did make. .Mrs. 15erridge was emphatic in her statements that the Public Trustee made a will, which she did not see at the time. This will was proved. She further insisted that when Enroth was on his deathbed a new will was brought to him by the Public Trustee's representative, but Enroth wah too ill to sign it. This unsigned will ' was, she said, seen by Dr. Home and a nurse, and she thought that the Public Trustee's representative took the will away.

.Mr. Johnstone, however, read a letter from Enroth to the Public Trustee giving instructions for an alteration to his will, and these alterations constituted a will exactly s'inilar to that proved, leaving plaintiff. .'iOs per week. The New Plymouth representative of the Public Trustee also wrote to bis head office #tating that he had altered Enroth's will at the request of the latter and "now sent the new will signed." Either Enroth had three wills by the Public Trustee, or there was no will made whieh Enroth was too ill to sign. Yet on his deathbed Enroth was heard to say. ''Let Mr. Samuel's will stand,"

FURTHER EVIDENCE. [ 'Cross-examined by Mr. Johnstone, Clara Berridge stated that during the time she was married to Enroth they lived happily and in greater comfort than she had done before or since. She had less work to do. Enroth gave her about £2OO soon after her marriage, but it might have been a little more. All the furniture and effects in the house at his death came to her. His personal effects were very small. The i furniture was always hers. Enroth, as far as she knew, built the two houses entirely out of his own monev. To his Ifenor: The £2OO received from Enroth Was a gift. When she gave him the £3OO it was on the understanding that he repaired the house thev lived in. This was done to the extent of £4O. To Mr. Johnstone: The rents and profits of the properties could not have been all absorbed in household expenses, which were small. They were all paid to Enroth. They lived in "The Grange," and the other houses were let for £1 per week each up to the.dale of Enroth's death. She did not know that Enroth had remittances from Australia. He banked with the Bank of New Zealand. Tradesmen's accounts were, she thought, paid by cheque. There was a will brought to Enroth on his death-bed, but he could not sign it, and it was ■handed to the nurse and to Dr. Home. She thought that the Public Trustee's representative took it back. Mr. Quilliam closed the ease for the plaintiff, hut asked leave to call evidence, if necessary, as to the value of the houses built' by Enroth on the plaintiff's land.

ENROTH'S ENGLISH EXPLOITS. Probably no one will ever know all the romance and tragedy of Enroth's life. From an affidavit made by 11. 11. Earle, whieh Mr. Johnstone read during the course of the ease, it appeared that Enroth must have led for years the life of a hunted man. The deponent stated that on March 28, 1904, a man named Ebenezer Thome, a gentleman farmer living in Devonshire, was married to his (deponent's) mother, Mrs. He»ti»Ua Earl, at St. David's Chuveh. Exetw. On May 5, 190G, Mrs. Earle. or Mrs. Therm 1 , as she then was, died intestate, and Enroth applied for letters of administration of her estate, which were granted to him on November 2(1, 1906. Enroth immediately realised the property and left England with money and securities to the value of £3400. Earle subsequently heard that Enroth had a wife in Brisbane when he was married to Mrs. Earle, and he immediately applied for an injunction to restrain Enroth from further dealing with the estate, which was granted lo him on November 1.1, 1900. On January 5, 1007. he obtained letters of administration in favor of himself. Enroth, however, was by this time lost sight of, along with the £3400. It had since been disclosed that he went across to America, where he lived in seclusion for a while, afterwards coming to Auckland, and subsequently to New Plymouth, in October. 1900. After his death in 1911, 11. IT. Earle heard of his doings, and immediately put in a claim against the estate for £3554.

A KNOTTY POINT. These were nil the facts disclosed in the Court yesterday. At the conclusion of the evidence, argument ensued between counsel as to the most equitable settlement which could bo arrived at. Mr. Quilliam had, earlier in the case, made a tentative suggestion that the value of,the two houses built by Enroth on Mrs. IScrridge's property should be taken at CI 100, and that this properly should he transferred to Mrs. Berridge. From this value (here should be deducted C 145, being the amount by which Enroth increased the original mortgage on the properly, and £3OO, being the amount which Mrs. Berridge paid to Enroth, she then giving a second mortgage over the property for the balance left due to Enroth's estate. Mr. Johnstone stated that the Public Trustee was, and always had been, fully in sympathy with .Mrs, Berridge in her unfortunate position, and that he only sought for an equitable settlement (o be made by the Court, which would protect him in case of action by any other parties. He had to keep in view the claims of (lie survivor of Airs. Earle. If his Honor were satisfied with the affidavits regarding the identity of Enroth, he was unable to contend that the transfer to him should not be set aside. The only question that remained was that of allowing for the improvements made by Enroth to Mrs. Berridge's properly. Mr. Quilliam pointed out that if the property were transferred to Mrs. Berridge, this would simply mean saddling her with the unprofitable investment of •house property, which she wan not in a position to keep up. Again, it was an (dement in (he consideration of the cn*e. thai, by accepting a transfer, Mrs. B'T-

ridge would forfeit her right under Enroth's will to the income of 30s per week, and to the power of appointment over the £3OO. Further, that s.mv. the transfer Enroth had lieeii in receipt of all the rents and profits from irni property. 11 is Honor: If I made an order for restitution it might be appealed against, which would entail more expense, although I can't see how any man could claim against the estate in the circumstances. During a discussion on the value of the property, it was mentioned that the Stamp Department was now claiming .duty oii Enroth's bequest to Mrs. Herridge as on a bequest to a stranger in iblood. Much legal argument ensued as to the claims of Mrs. Berridge, both in law and equity, and authorities were quoted by | both counsel. z His Honor finally intimated that he j .would reserve his decision and look in- ! to the law quoted.