The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1849-12-18

WAsmssrok, Dec 10, I6i9
Mr. Richard 8 Coke closed to-day his argument for the
administrator OF the personal estate Of Col Bomford, and OF
the suretes Of the the probate bonds Of
estate He spoke In high of kosciusko but anmad
veed upon the synopsis Of his biography as given by the
Hon ReyeIdy Johnson the conclusion OF his argument
for the heirs Of koscusko Mr. Coke maintained that those
represent themselves be the OF kin of
claim his estate by appealing TO Koscuskos merits and
services rendered his country; whilst the demurrans
from respect his memory resist their claim in order that
his will expressed In his parliamentary dispositions OF
lT93 and 1906 shall take effect The revoking clause OF
The will OF 1876 under which the complanan claim, does
affect Koscuskos property in the United States and
the orphans court had jurisdiction to establish that
will and revoke the of the wills Of 7Ss and 1906
He charged that the viii of 1876 upon which the complain
rely, has been filed with the bill, which Mr. Coke
considered fatal" He then urged that the authorities
cited by both counsel OF the companants against he
and sustained the objection of muariousness He said
that the oomplanans unjusty complain against delay as
they the persons who presented claim to the estate
in 1919, and filed bill in 1923 The bill OF the comPainants
was filed in September, 1913, for the first time.
After Mr. Coke had concluded Major Tochman rose and
said that the learned counsel, who down. misconceved
or misconsuued the biographical statement of the Hon
Reverdy Johnson The latter speaking OF kosciusko said
that he did change his opinion during the French rev.
oluon And the counsel the other side, commenting
upon it, denies koscuskos serving In the French ar
my, taking part in the French revolution This put
ting the lips Of Mr. johnson what he did not say and
did to Here the Court sad this has no bear
ing upon the demurrer !" which repeated by Mr. Coke
81 know it," rejoined Major shut II Is msconsruc-
ton which mputes gross ignorance Of history and, there
FORE deem due the Hon Revedy Johnson, who Is abb
sent it," Major T. then claimed the right TO
Join portions of the argument Of Mr. Coxe upon the
ground that the latter introduced new matters; which be-
ing granted he said that the counsel the other sde in
stead arguing the demurrers enlarged upon the merits OF
the We not before this court to try whether the
orphans had had not the power to establish the
viii of 1876 and revoke the probaes Of the wills of l79S
and 1896. This question could be brought here only
by appeal from the decision of the orpans' court
and this, too, by the holders Of the funds Of kosc
usko by those who may interest in sustaining the
wills of 1898 and 1906 Those who Interested in
the will Of l795 and which, if sustained, would exhaust
the whole fund.- have taken appeal and do not contest
the decision of the orphans revoking the probate
thereof If the holders Of the funds Of koscusko lear for
their safety their defence is not by demurrer They should
ans the bill OF the compairants, file bill OF inter.
peader and bring moneys due from them into this court
In support of this argument Major T. referred the
POI Of Story's Eq r., and to Mitfs Ed P by Jer-
envy pages 49, l2 lab He rented the charge thar the
will of 1916 has been filed, by taking its Office copy
from amongst the papers which this time under
the control Of Mr. Coke and showing it to the court To
this Mr. Coke answered. "that it was taken from the
pocket and st put amongst the papers, This charge
created confusion amongst some hearers but MAJOR
seeming notice H. with great self possession called
upon the clerk produce the docket and when this
doe he asked him tell the judges how many exhibits
filed by him with the bill The answer being given
"Sx Major T. handed the original bill to the Hon Judge
to in BILL and marked in the margin The Judge
after examining the BILL said, "Six Mr. Coke" Wheeup
on Major said 81 have nothing more TO say on this suit
ect will add that, not the will OF 1916 filed, II
would be Jatai;' as 1t is the evidence to support
charges of BILL could therefore be produced at another
stage OF the proceedings. And If such objection were
worth anything il would 10 to the form OF the bill; i
therefore could be assigned upon the demurrer ore fus
refer your honors in this respect to section 44s OF Story
Eq Plead" Major I. then explained that the complain
ants of the Etsko branch the persons who
sented their claim the estate in 1Sl9 and who filed
bill in 1873. Some of them then acted by tutors or guar
dams, being themselves minors These now filed bill IL
their The interest OF others represented b.
John f. Ennis, of this city, administrator of some witt
died during the tendency OF this proaced litigation Tit
branch of Fokowski's for the first time before thu
American in ls45 They descendants Of the
ond OF Kosciusko and the Etskos who descend
ants his rt sister, do not contest their rights The in
teest of OF those last mentioned is represented b,
Samuel s. William, administrator Of those who dead
Major T. concluded that other points of the argument
Mr. Coke being matter, and having been ALREADY
fully argued by the Hon. Reverdy Johnson and himself h
submits the case the decision Of the court The cour
then took the under advisement and proceeded
hear other cases AMERICANUS.