NOTE: This is but one of many cases of a type what I call “Testamentary Parental Kidnapping,” a type of malicious child/parent access denial related to what is commonly called Parental Alienation.
FULL TEXT: Cleveland, Ohio, Dec. 10 – Wills frequently reveal the skeleton in
the family closet, but seldom have they done so with the thoroughness that characterizes
the last testament of Mary B. Needham, who once lived in Washington with her husband. Mrs. Needham
left a large fortune – a quarter of a million dollars – and left all of it to
her ten-year-old son, but on a condition of a most startling character. This
condition is that the boy must never associate with his father or his father’s
parents. This legacy of hate received by the lad from his dead mother is the
natural inheritance from many bitter years of her life. It tells a story of
love turned to hate as the result of dissensions over money. One of the
distressing features is that the boy receives this unnatural legacy gladly.
The clause of Mr. Needham’s will enforcing this strange
provision follows that portion of the instrument which makes the young boy her
sole heir. It reads:
If, however, the said Benjamin, after he arrives at sixteen
years of age, should associate with or live with or be, with or without said
Benjamin’s consent, as associate or friend of either Otis N. Needham or Fannie
Maria Needham or Frederick F. Needham, whom I have good reason to know are
improper and unsuitable persons for said Benjamin to be with, or be influenced
by them, in that case, and my trustee shall be fully satisfied that said
Benjamin Fridley shall voluntarily set my wishes, as above expressed, aside,
then I direct my said trustee and his successors in trust to declare the
foregoing bequest hereinabove provided for him as wholly forfeited, and in that
case I declare that no part of said estate, except so far as the same as herein
provided for his support, shall be delivered to said Benjamin.
~ Was a Divorced Wife. ~
Mrs. Needham was the divorced wife of Frederick F. Needham,
who has since remarried and is now living in this city. Otis N. Needham and
Fannie Maria Needham, whose names are mentioned in this will, are his father
and mother. They are residents of this city and known through their connection
with the Livingstone, which was once operated on the present site of the
present Hotel Euclid. Frederick F. Needham, their son, was associated with them
in this enterprise.
Mrs. Needham left her husband in 1897 and soon after
obtained a divorce. She took up her residence in an apartment house in Dodge street, with
her boy, Benjamin, or Fridley,
as he was called by the family. She died August 5, 1902. The late W. C.
McFarland was appointed trustee and guardian in accordance with the request of
Mrs. Needham in her will. He has since died, and the boy is in charge of Miss
McFarland, a sister of the attorney.
Frederick
F. Needham began proceedings in the Probate Court to be appointed his guardian,
claiming that right because he was the father. This request Judge White refused
after a careful investigation into the history of the case, and Miss McFarland
was made guardian of the youthful heir, while William G. Taylor was appointed
trustee of the fortune. Miss McFarland lives at 60 Hough avenue, where the boy
makes his home.
~
Wrote Out Complete Story ~
The
skeleton of the Needham family has been frequently exhibited in the courts. Its
exhibition came through the sensational litigation attending the divorce
proceedings and subsequent civil actions brought to recover property which the
family held. The several actions, although in a way connected, revealed only a.
part of the story. The rigid rules of evidence would not permit a greater
exhibition. But the complete story is spread
on
papers in the handwriting on Mrs. Needham. carefully locked up in the safes of
the attorneys concerned in the litigation.
It is
a story of love and love turned to hate. The late Mrs. Mary B. Needham was
talented and accomplished, but eccentric in many ways. She was the youngest of
Judge Benjamin Franklin Fridley’s three daughters. The late judge was one of
the foremost jurists in Illinois. He was wealthy, was at one time the law
partner of Stephen A. Douglas, and served a term as governor of Illinois. The
family home was at Aurora, Ill., when Mrs. Eliza
Fridley, the widow of the judge, is still living. She is now eighty-seven years
of age.
~
Eloped to Be Married. ~
When
a pupil in the high school of that city May Fridley. as she was called, met
Frederick F. Needham. Her father and mother had moved to Aurora soon after the
Chicago fire. Young Needham was a dashing youth and handsome. He won the heart
of the girl in spite of the fact that the judge disapproved of the suit. The
Fridley family held a high social position. May, although young, had shown an
unusual aptitude for study and an inclination for books. She was the pride of
the stern old judge, and he had determined that her marriage would be a brilliant alliance. He did not like
Needham, in spite of his polished manners and fine appearance.
May
completed her education in an Eastern college and became an accomplished
musician and master of several languages. She was a brilliant
conversationalist. One day the judge received a telegram from Denver informing
him of the marriage of his daughter to Needham. The blow was a severe one to
him, as he was growing old. He sternly refused to give the union his blessing.
Needham
and his wife remained in Denver only a short time, and in the next few years
lived in various cities. They came East and resided for a time at Warsaw, Fort
Wayne, Spencer, and Indianapolis, in Indiana. Then they went to Washington.
From the latter place the birth of a boy was announced. The judge then put
behind him the resentment which
he had held so many years and sent the child a liberal gift. Needham’s father
took the Livingstone Hotel in 1895, and Frederick Needham came to this city to
help him in the enterprise. But it failed to pay, and the sheriff assumed
control.
~
Quarreled Over Money. ~
Mrs.
Needham and her husband had frequent quarrels over money matters, which finally
led to their separation. Mrs. Needham bought the Victoria apartment house, as
the death of her father had made her wealthy, and took up her residence there.
During
all the years of her married life she had concealed from her father and mother
all idea of her unhappiness. At times she was put to great straits to
accomplish this, but the judge died without suspicion of the status of affairs.
He loved the boy and in his will provided for his daughter liberally, because
he was anxious that the little fellow should be well taken care of.
Her
devotion to the boy was marked. She held before him at all times the honorable
career of her father. Soon after her separation from her husband the child was
kidnapped while out for an airing on Euclid avenue. She immediately called her
former husband to the telephone and threatened him with arrest if the boy was
not returned to her immediately. The boy was returned in a few hours.
~ Boy
Takes Mother’s Part. ~
The
disposal of her petition for divorce gave him control of the child, who
by this time
had grown to be a particularly bright boy. He was idolized by his mother’s
servants. On the death of his mother he was taken into the home of her
attorney, Mr. McFarland, on whom his mother had relied so strongly during her
life. He became one of the McFarland family. Mr. McFarland was taken from him
and his cause was espoused by Miss McFarland.
When
Frederick F. Needham attempted to gain possession of the boy, in spite of the
will of Mrs. Needham, she went into court and fought for the child. At last
Judge White refused to grant the petition of Needham. On hearing the verdict
the little fellow fairly jumped for joy, and, clapping his hands, cried: “We’ve
won; we’ve won!”
Although
but ten years of age, he means to follow his mother’s hatred of Frederick Needham.
[“Left
Legacy Of Hate - Mother Wills Fortune to Boy on Strange Condition. - MUST Ever Spite Father - Mrs. Mary Needham,
Who Once Lived in Washington, Forbids Her Son to Associate With His Father or His Father’s
Parents Under Penalty of Losing His Inheritance—Lad Accepts Bequest.” The
Washington Post (D.C.), Dec. 11, 1904, part 4, p. 1]
No comments:
Post a Comment