not been given. As a matter of fact Calvin Frye never acted as adviser but as executor of Mrs. Eddy’s wishes.
Playing upon this prejudice toward the secretary, the newspaper representative appears to have found it easy to induce Glover to exaggerate in his own mind the sense of his grievances and to catch the fear that he would eventually be wrongfully deprived of his inheritance by those men of affairs with whom his mother had so long associated. Glover was induced to believe that he was in a pitiable condition of neglect and that powerful friends had been raised up by the newspaper to aid him. Thus he beheld his “legal opportunity” to interfere in the management of his mother’s affairs.
As soon as George Glover consented to act in a suit at law nominally for his mother’s interests, but in reality against her every wish and purpose, her only other heirs were sought out by this same agency and persuaded to join the issue. These heirs were her adopted son, Ebenezer Foster-Eddy, and George W. Baker, her nephew. The suit was brought by the sons and nephew, together with Glover’s oldest child, Mary Baker Glover. It was called the petition of next friends, or exactly, “The petition of Mary Baker Glover Eddy who sues by her next friends George W. Glover, Mary Baker Glover, and George W. Baker against Calvin A. Frye, Alfred Farlow, Irving C. Tomlinson, Ira O. Knapp, William B. Johnson, Stephen A. Chase, Joseph Armstrong, Edward A. Kimball, Hermann S. Hering, and Lewis C. Strang.”
