Note: James Peter Allaire's Will shows her name "Calicia Allaire Tompkins Allaire"

Photo Courtesy of FerdonL on Ancestry.com

Parents: Noah Bishop Tompkins 1790 Greenburgh NY – 15 Sept 1839 White Plains Westchester, NY and Sarah Martine 1790 – 1870 Greenburgh, NY

New York Herald (NY NY) Thur 3 Oct 1878

Died – Allaire - - At Allaire, Monmouth Co, NJ on Wed Oct 2, at 8:15 pm, Calicia Allaire Tompkins, widow of James P Allaire, late of New York.
Funeral services at Allaire, NJ, Friday Oct 4. Interment same day at New Rochelle, NY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1870 Federal Census, Wall, Monmouth, NJ
Calusia Allaire Age 59 (1811) NY Farmer
Hall Allaire Age 23 (1847) NJ Farmer

Catharine Johnson Age 77 (1793) NJ
Susan G Johnson Age 84 (1786) NJ
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
New York State Census – 1855
James P Allaire Age 68 (1787) Nova Scotia Engineer
Calicia A F Allaire Age 44 (1811) NY
Hal Allaire Age 7 (1848) NY

Sister: Susan G Johnson Age 69 (1786) New Jersey
Sister: Catherine S Johnson Age 62 (1793) New Jersey
Brother: Andrew B Allaire Age 61 (1794) NY
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Thu, Nov 21, 1867 | Mercury (New York, NY)

A retrial of the Allaire Will Case - Frances W Roe et all, vs Calicia A T Allaire, Executrix - This case originated in the Surrogate's Court, was appealed from there to the General Term of the Supreme Court, and sent from the later to the Circuit to have a jury pass upon the issues.

Plaintiff represents certain children, by the first wife, of James P Allaire, deceased, formerly a prominent machinist and boiler maker of that city. Defendant is the widow and second wife of Mr Allaire, and has one son, a young man, named Hal Hallaire.

Mr Allaire made a will on the 7th of October, 1850, shortly after the birth of Hal, by which he left the children by his first wife, four in number, of only $100 each; to a grandchild of Mrs Roe (the plaintiff) a farm in New Jersey, and the rest of his property to his second wife (who was made his Executrix) and her son Hal.

It is contended on behalf of the plaintiff that the estate left by Mr Allaire was worth $250,000; that no satisfactory reason could be shown why the children by his first wife were cut off with the paltry sum of $100 each, while the bulk of the estate went to the second wife and her son; that the best of feeling existed between the children by the first wife and Mr Allaire, and that these children were astonished when the contents of the will was made known to them.

It is contended for defendant, that the property in question was worth no more than $100,000, and possibly not more than $50,000; that Allaire, who died on June 11th, 1858, at the age of 70, was at the time of his death in full possession of his senses; was perfectly cognizant of what he was doing when he made his will, and had good and substantial reasons for framing it as he did.

The cased came to trial at the Circuit on the 2d of October, 1866, and was concluded on the morning of the 5th of the same month. In the summing up of the case, counsel for the plaintiff laid great stress on the improbability of Mr Allaire cutting off these children with such a paltry sum unless undue influence had been used, and quoted from the testimony to show that defendant had taken every opportunity to alienate and estrange Mr Allaire from his children by his first wife. On the other hand, counsel for the defendant contended that the evidence showed that the conduct of the children by the first wife was of such a nature as to alienate the affections of Mr Allaire and give him just cause for making the will in question. The jury disagreed, standing nine of the opinion influence had been used and three of the opposite opinion. The case is now on for retrial on substantially the same evidence, and is not yet finished.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wed, Oct 10, 1866 | New-York Daily Reformer (Watertown, NY)

The Allaire Will Case - This case was called on and the trial commenced on Tuesday in Circuit Court, before Justice Davis and a jury. Some of the particulars have already been published in our columns during the time the will was under consideration before the Surrogate. It will be proper to restate them. Mr James P Allaire died on the 22d of June 1858, at an advanced age. He was a man well-known in this community for his wealth, his mechanical genius and his enterprise. The Allaire Works, on the East River side of the city, are at the present time a monument to his skill and industry. In October, 1850, it appears, that he made a will, whereby he bequeathed to his four children - two sons and two daughters, by a first wife - very small sums of money. One of the sons received a legacy of the sum of $100 by this will. His estate, at the time of his death, according to what transpired yesterday, was valued at over $200,000. Some of the property consisted of ready money, but by far the greatest portion of it was invested in farms in New Jersey. Two of these farms were known as the Brook Farm and the Jones Farm. The great difficulty so far as the settlement of the terms of this will are concerned, consists of the fact that for some time prior to the death of the first wife of Mr Allaire, a woman distantly connected with the family, became a sort of general nurse and housekeeper for Mr A's establishment. Her real name, it seems was originally Calicia A Thompkins. This lady nursed the first Mrs Allaire through her last illness, and after the death of the latter, continued there as housekeeper and general manager for Mr A after the death of their mother, the four children, as appears by the evidence, became an uneasy and dissatisfied in relation to the housekeeper. Meanwhile, she continued to live and zealously work for the interest of their father, until it finally became evident to them that this housekeeper was no longer a single woman, but their step-mother - the wife of their father.

A son, which now goes by the name of Hal Allaire, was born in 1857 (1847?). By the terms of the will, the whole property, after a few small bequests to the children of the first wife, is to go to his second wife, Calicia Tompkins and her son. Mr Bradford, in opening the case, stated that it was his opinion that the property of the testator would not exceed $100,000; it might not exceed $60,000. On the other hand, Mr Lyon, who opened the case to the jury on behalf of the contestants, says that the whole amount involved will not be less than $260,000. After the will was admitted to probate, the children by the first wife employed counsel and took the case to the general term. That court decided the several points presented, which were - first, the question whether the instrument was executed according to the statutes of this State, and second, whether undue influence had been used on the part of Calicia Tompkins Allaire to induce him to make such a will. The majority of the Supreme Court were of the opinion that the will had been executed in a manner which sufficiently complied with the statute, and yet the question raised of undue influence was in such doubt that it would be necessary to send the case before a jury.