Omaha Opera Festival School Incorporated—Nebraska World's Fair Matters—The News at the Capital City.
LINCOLN, Neb., April 20,—The friends and family of Rev. S. D. Roberts have been
searching for him without success since yesterday. Mr. Roberts is a well-known
Methodist minister who has been engaged in ministerial work in this state for the last twenty years. For the last three years he has lived with his family at 1848 Euclid
avenue in this city. For several weeks he has been ill, and during the time he was
quite despondent.
Yesterday morning the family discovered when they arose that he had left the house. The bed showed signs of having been occupied, but nothing was found to indicate when he left. He left his watch and some money that was on the dresser. The family at once commenced a search for the missing man. As no trace was found later in the day City Detective Malone was called in and joined in the endeavor to [?] him. All efforts up to this time have been fruitless, and there is as little known tonight as when the fact that he had left the house was first discovered. The family and intimate friends are confident that he will never be found alive. They do not doubt but that his mind has become deranged from his sickness and branding over business troubles. Many incidents of the last few days which were passed by as of trivial importance at the time are now recalled to support the theory.
Rev. S. D. Roberts is described as a man about five feet eight or nine inches in
height, and of slender build. He wears a sandy mustache and chin beard. When he
left home he wore a high silk hat, a dark Prince Albert coat, dark vest and pantaloons, and laced shoes, lie is about 48 years of age. He was for six years presiding eider of the Beatrice district of the Methodist church, and was for three years pastor of the church at David City. He lived in Beatrice seven years. He has alsolived in Peru and Fairbury. He was
formerly pastor of the Tricity Methodist
Episcopal church in this city, but for
nearly two years he has had no
regular charge. For four years he has
been connected with the proprietorship of
the Beatrice Chautauqua and for two years
was president and general manager ofo it.
He was at one time a half owner of it. Up
to the time of the recent reorganization of
this enterprise it was not a financial suc-
cess and Air. Roberts sustained some se-
verse loses. He has worried a great deal
over the indebtedness of the Chautauqua
and to his distress over its affairs maybe
attributed, his friends say, his recent ill-
ness. last fall he attended confer-
ence and was assigned the
charge at Plattsmouth, where he worked
for some six weeks with spiritual results
that were highly gratifying to himself, but
he was finally compiled to give up his
charge there because of his Chautauqua
troubles.
Since that time he has been filling oc-
casional appointments by the presiding
elder. Friends who are well acquainted
with his affairs say that he is possessed of
property worth something like $50,030. He
owns a comfortable home at 1846 Euclid
Avenue, where he lived with his wife and
four children. He also owned two blocks
and a half in University place, one farm
near Crute, two farms in Fillmore county
and other valuable property, Mr. Roberts
served for three years in the army during
the war of 1861-65. He has no relatives
living in Nebraska. Preparations are
being made tonight to organize a large
searching party and go carefully over all
the country south and southeast of the city.
Is the Law Constitutional
In the supreme court today was filed the
case of Henry Trumble and others against
Martha Trumble and others, a proceeding
in error from Lancaster county.
The case was commenced in the probate
court by Martha Trumble, the widow of
William Trumble, who asked that an order
admitting the will of William Trumble to
probate be set aside. The widow decares
her intention to take under the statute and
not under the will.
The widow gained her point in the pro-
bate court and an order was made giving
to her her homestead interest and her one-
third interest in other property as provided
by the set of 1880. The case was carried
to the district court and the judgment in
favor of the widow was affirmed. The
case is now brought up by Henry Trum-
ble, one of the heirs and administrators of
the estate of William Trumble. The point
relied upon by the plaintiff in error is the
unconstitutionality of the act of 1808. The
same question was raised in the case of the
settlement of the John Sheedy estate, but
the case was compromised and dismissed
before trial.
The brief of plaintiffs in error in the
Trumble case recites the objections of the
act, which is the law regulating the distru-
bution of estaten. The objections are:
That the act contains more than one sub-
jects; that the act is broader than its title;
that it directly and by implication amends
several sections of the acts relating to wills,
dower, courtesy and married women, with-
out repealing said suctions and re-enacting
them entire: that it contravenes that part
of the constitution which provides that no
law shall be amended unless the new set
contains the section or sections so amended,
and the section or sections so amended
shall be repealed; that the act is an in-
vasion of vested rights and is in conflict
with the constitutional provision that no
person shall be deprived of his property
without due process of law.
The question is an interesting one to
lawyers, and, if brought to a hearing, will
determine the question of the soundness of
the act of 1885, which gives to the wife a
fee simple title to realty instead of a dower
interset, as formerly, Reese and Hillkerson
are the attorneys for plaintiffs in error in
the case.
