Henry C. Ward Incompetent

The morning session of the Henry C. Ward hearing in the probate court was marked by a conflict between the attorneys for the petitioners and those representing Ward over the introduction of the testimony of Dr. H. N. Chapman. Dr. Chapman was placed on the stand by the petitioners but the attorneys for the defense objected to the first question asked the witness and the case could not proceed until the court had given its ruling. The question raised by the defense was that Dr. Chapman as family physician to Henry C. Ward had no right to divulge anything Ward had told him. Attorney Perry for the petitioners argued that the witness had a right to testify to anything Ward might have said that did not relate to his own physical condition. The point was argued pro and con by the lawyers on both sides and the court finally took a recess of ten minutes to look up some law on the subject. Several cases were cited and construed by both sides but the court finally decided to allow the witness to testify to any conversation that might have occurred that did not relate to Ward's condition. Dr. Chapman's Testimony. Dr. Chapman testified that Henry C. Ward had called at his home early on the morning of December 17 before the doctor got up and requested to have a long talk with him. The request was granted and Ward talked for some time on rambling topics covering a period since 1862 when his father had taken him to Washington. According to the witness, Ward talked incoherently about visiting Edison at Buffalo to learn about his invention by which he was to throw a halo around the heads of his statues and said he had been working on the invention for 15 years. About this time Dr. Chapman was called to breakfast and Ward accompanied him to the table but only ate scarcely. He left later for Detroit but before going asked permission to stay all night at Dr. Chapman's. Dr. Chapman said he told Ward to stop when he came back and he would give him some medicine to make him sleep nights. Wanted Lodging. That night Ward called at the Chapman home and said he was going to stay all night. He removed his coat, vest, and shoes, and retired to a couch where he proceeded to fall fast asleep. Meanwhile Mrs. Chapman called the doctor at his office and told him of Ward's presence in the house. The doctor then notified the sons who came to the Chapman house but had difficulty in persuading their father to accompany them home. A Foreign Gem. Dr. Chapman testified to meeting Ward on a D. & P. car a short time later when Ward exhibited a vase he claimed had been purchased from the dowager empress of China at a huge cost. Among other things said to have been stated by Ward are "My life is an open book. I took the life of Geo. Washington as my motto and have followed it ever since." At the conclusion of his direct examination Dr. Chapman was asked for his opinion relative to Ward's condition and said: "I thought his talk was silly and foolish and came to the conclusion that Henry C. Ward was of unsound mind." Dr. Galbraith Called. Dr. Stuart E. Galbraith was one of the first witnesses called to the stand this morning. Dr. Galbraith had made an examination of Ward and was asked for an expert opinion as to his condition. Dr. Galbraith testified that he believed Ward was incompetent either to manage his business affairs or care for himself, that he had manifested symptoms, which while not serious at the present time, would lead to the belief that the patient would grow worse in the future. Charles Ward Angry. During a lull in the testimony of Dr. Galbraith, Charles Ward, of New York, a brother of Henry C. Ward arose and addressing himself to the witness said in an angry tone, "I don't care to shake hands with you. My indignation has risen clear to the top. Such slander as has been brought into this case." Judge Brown called the court to order before Chas. Ward could further relieve his mind at the expense of the witness, Dr. Galbraith. The son, Frank B. Ward, was placed on the stand this morning for a short time to continue his cross examination commenced yesterday afternoon but gave way to Dr. Chapman as soon as the latter arrived. Frank Ward's testimony all related to business matters in which his father was interested. That was quite a dramatic moment in the courtroom! Believes Father Incompetent. "I believe he is absolutely incompetent to manage either his business affairs or his person," was the statement of Franklin B. Ward yesterday afternoon when questioned by Attorney Perry as to his best judgment of his father, Henry C. Ward's condition. Frank B. Ward occupied the witness chair the entire afternoon yesterday. His testimony was of the same character as given at the hearing of the petition for a temporary guardian for his father but as to his father's financial affairs it went into more detail. Frank Ward said his father's actual indebtedness which must be paid amounted to $145,555 and this did not include the $15,000 due on his life insurance. The witness stated that Ward carried about $80,000 insurance but had made frequent loans upon it. Of the amount owed by Ward $20,000 is due a San Francisco art firm where Ward bought many of his fine pieces for his art collection. On cross-examination the son claimed his father had received in dividends from the David Ward estate something like $187,653.40 up to Jan. 1, but much of this amount had been applied on his trust mortgage for the benefit of his creditors. In addition to this Ward has received $1,879.33 from his mother, Mrs. Elizabeth Ward's estate. During the last year Frank Ward said his father had received from him $60,000 and a loan of $200. Made $100,000 On Stocks. When questioned as to his father’s success on the stock market, Frank Ward admitted that his father had made about $100,000 on stocks and that the family had marveled at his success. On the other hand the son said his father had bought quantities of stock when it was quoted at a high figure and the stocks have slumped until in many cases they are worth but a quarter of their purchase price. Attorney John H. Patterson questioned the son relative to his father’s investment of $25,000 in the Hanson-Ward Veneering company of Bay City, which, according to the son, has been running for four years but has never declared a dividend. Mr. Patterson wanted to know why Frank allowed his father to invest so large a sum in a plant in which the son was interested while a mortgage foreclosure of the property at Leamington, Ont., was liable to take place at any time. The son decided it was his father’s wish that the mortgage foreclosure be left open and that the $25,000 be invested in the Bay City firm.