The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1848-02-07
RTlss Two Csatss

estao'hsa as the one contsnded for upon 20 enght-
eped tribunal that OF the Supreme Court OF tho
United States WILL therefore, turn my attention to
the proofs Of record to be applied under tbs princp,
At 2la OF the printed record tho testimony Of Mad
Bnguer,i tunim2esched proycs the acknowledgment OF
De Grange IN New Orleans that hs was married man
at the time h married Miss Carriere and he'd absn
donsd ri, rct wife and the witness testdss that
sac knew The .sld st wife in New Orleans afts- the
second marriage which shows that she alive the
time took place and that the said rst wife brought
with her proofs Of her marriage consequently thu said
second marriage null and void, ab nitiO see also
the testimony OF Madame Despsu p i63, who proves
the destruction OF the registry of marriage in New York
To put all doubts AZ TO the correctness of TIL, tet-
mony at rest at page 2o6 the certified copy Of tina
mutiated record Of n suit Of Zuime De Csrrere
Jerome De Grange brought in tire late City Court of
the Territory of Orleans, for bgamy, and but for the
LOSE par. Of tho record 10 this case paro testimony
tn. first arrsge would have to be 10;
bat what BIO conclusive In the OF proofof
any fact not Of record than that which has been ad
duosd in this nsancei Here is beginning Of proof ia
writing, (the record OF thu suit conDrmod and most
himself Voluntarily made which ackno dgment alone
under the decisions herein before referred to- amply
sufficient to prove the marriage It will be seem too that
under these decisions it to the
usual Of showing the loss of the written evidence
even n it were clear that the laws of New York or Of
should be kept and that other proof Of the ceeba
ton should be given trialr Of this kind
The establishment of this arst aud important point,
opens wide door for the admission OF all the Others the
truth whereof will to follow, step by STEP almcst
% O matter Of course.
will hasten therefore to the
Proofs and arguments to establish The Second Point
ner the proof of the marriage of claimants mother 10
De Grange in New Orleans, woula seem to devove upon
doubt about the fact it proper to admit Gas the test
mony of several OF the witnesses show that this
De Carrsre in the city Of New Orleans about the year
1894; otherwise 1t would not have been necessary for
her to bring suit she did against the OF De
Grange In the year 1906 Indeed this suit not
cessary all She had do to obtain the proof Of
and void, c6 inio, 80 far as she was concerned.
To establish the second ground Of this point TO wit:
ried the second the testimony of Madame Benguere
to be found at aia Of tho record, and already com
the court to DO satisfied to the existence of the said
| first wife.
Proofs and arguments 10 establish The Third Point
This marriage is so clearly established by the evidence
Of record that sha do but little than
sa Si n. a. 70 Dc
that she went to Philadelphia to obtain proof
had lett the county and the rsod coua be
found and that Clark acknowledged the marriage to
Wis, Mr. Daniel w. Coke, and Mr. Richard Ref of his
marriage Add to this positive, unim peached and
testimony the fact OF Clarke repeated &C
knowedgment to her and TO mary others Of the claim
ant 90 being his child and the moot skeptiee could not
find pretext upon which to hang doubt, AS to this
marriage the same witness pr.ssnt at the birth OF
claimant in 1906 and knows her TO be- the person
Bu to make assurance dou5y refer particularly
to tho testimony OF Pierre Baron Bosioriane in whose
house the raid child born to b, found ut p ll9;
Clark not only acknowledged ths marriage to MIN, but
also acknowledged The chd provided for ner and sold
| that he should acknowledge her IN his will
| The same Acknowledgment WAS made 20 Madame
The fact of Clsrks marriage bsiog thu, established
beyond doubt, viii row show the legal effect OF IL
| touching the RICH Of claimant
See Civil Code of 1905 rage a. Title of Father and
Child Article T. which says The law considers the
husband Of the mother ms the father OF all children
ceived during tn. marriage The admits neither the
exception Of the weS adultery noe the allegation oftho
| husbands natural or accid n al inpotency.n
Tbs amended code Of 1925 commencing at Article 1877
has the same provision.
See also testimony generally, showing that there was
| 10 other child born OF this marriaSe.
Proofs and arguments estcb tsh he Fourth P0irt
The Civil Code OF 1906 Ia at the time OF Carks
Thas doaations either or norris osusa can
exceed the nth part Of the property OF the dsposr,
dren, or descendants born to be born" This law
eds no comment has been recognized by many de-
possibly be- asked, what will S:oons OF the oommunisy
rights Of the mother IL the marriage to Clark be es;ab
ished' II SOL would answer that sufficient for the day
is the evil thereof that such plea claim La. been
set the preseSt that whenever it 10 made,
shall be fully prepared to meet It, Perhaps msy DO
hes assigned disposed OF her rights, that tbs
manty was actually insovsas sp4 that The whole of the
property ia question belonged 10 Clark before his
rage, and consequently does not ener into the eennu
| nity.
Proofs ard arguments 10 establish ths rim Point
The procf the execution az loss destruction OF
ths will, 80 arm pie ard conouave, shown upon the
record, tina. sm rally ut loss to decide upon the
manner in which sha cali the attention CT court
to IT, species of argument By way Of explanation,
ton nor i, the proof Of s oostens much less abun
dant but know that the caimsntf feels deep inter-
est in the establishment Of these rsc. must crave the
indulgence of the Court, whilst large upon
tia testimony to be relied but wisn IL to be dis
tincty understood that doing So sha not lose sight
Of tbs uncontrovertsd prneplsof Inv laid down the
fourth point thst tho claimant must four iths
of the estate if the will OF 1913 should not be sat
set cut with the assertion that there Is no
oepton which takes will, out of the general rule OF evi
governing the proof Of the conten of lost deeds
written Instrumentation the contrary, it has been
laid down in starkie, that the contents Of will have
boar haQa fhn Art1f hahn
in The Court or Chsncery, could got be procured.
Three dstinct kinds OF wills may be executed under
the laws OF Louisiana as they existed In 1879 and
thsy now exist of which Is called ologrsphic
viii or testament, which is made snd written by the
tetator himself without the presence OF any witness
it NAV be either open or sealed bus when it is sealed E
needs other superscrpon than this, words equiv
supersc,p,ion must be signed by the "-Civ
Code Of 1908, p $50, AIT. l03.
IAN oiographic testament or codic shall not bs
lid unees It DO entirely written signed and dated with
the Tsstator's hand III.
clothed With all The minutiao Of form pointed Out by ths
law to prove this beyond doubt RESORT to the eyi-
The testimony OF Madame Smith, this point, will
be found a. 1870 she very intimately acq usinted
with MIR. Clark sucked the claimant, who gso
knowlode,d by him to be his only child, and vho was
to inherit his fortune MIR Clark explained to her why
child by confidential transfer of property other wit
nesscs, to whom there transfers were made to wit
ssml psy,s Da'usu dc Ia Crcx and 10, Dsvhe De-
year 1913 Mr. Clark told witness that he had desrnn-
cd to protect the interest OF his child By executing
Their will, in which he intendsd to acknowledge her
his legitimate child rs did execute the intended wi
and brought to the house Of witness before
his deoth-she read It, and well remembers
The will was dated ia July, 1918, ooyrapnc
one written and signed by t.ststor sekaow
lodged by him. and In IL he declared the claimant
his only legitimate child and constituted her his uni
verss heir and legaes; the witness had possession OF
the win twenty four hours read 1t with great care aal
remembers its contents perfectly. Tho manner Of Mr..
Clark, when be presented the will TO witness TO read,
remarkable, and only such conscious Of bis
being father, could pu. assume his Whole con
versa.op, his last visit to witness about his
daughter, and of the most roiiag and alectonate
character In short tbs wbos Of this testimony IRE
sstibe and, when tskon ia connection win that OF
other Witnesses be considered being entitled to
unbounled credit.
The next wtnes IS, whose testimony most nsauy asst