The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-03-11
The Decision Ia the Great Gaines Case at
New Orleans.

MyRA CLARK GAINES, COMPLAINANT, VS. CHEW AND
RELF, AND oTHEKs-M LQUITY.
When | consider the decision OF the Supreme
Court Of the United States, in the case OF Games
and Wife We. Patterson, (6 Howard) i feel the
uimcst dlfhdence IN assuming, as l feel II my
duty to Go, the responsibility OF examining dc
any want Of respect for that decision, or tor
the high tribunal from which it emanated, But
feel most solemDly convinced, that the merlls
OF the present case have not been fully and fairly
facts and circumstances developed III the pro.
giess OF the trial, which present the rights OF
The parties in different light, the testimony OF
Patterson himself, who has been examined az a
witness, dscloses enough 10 lead my mlnd lrresls-
,by 10 The conclusion, that there serious
contest before The court Ii was proceeding
in which u Is perfectly apparent, that whatever
might be The result the defendant was TO sufier no
loss. HIS own statement shows that he IL now In
possession OF The very property which Was the
SUBJECT OF controversy. In consideration Of his
Willingness 10 aid the comtainanis In obtaining II
judgment OF The court settling ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
OF law In their favor, be has been rewarded by a
donation of the whole properly Even the costs
ano expenses incurred Ia the litigation have been
pad by he victorious party.
The couDsel who argued the cause and the
courts which decided II, were ignorant OF the pr-
vate, smIcable understanding that existed between
the partles; but This tact does not, IN my opinion,
relieve the case from Ii faint OF COLLISION, WHICH
renders the Judgmt itselt oi no binding force as
| tS UpJuON04 IL IL lHlppssUir hot W uioCcIH al u
glance The advantages willingly surrendered by
The defendant by bis refusal 10 join with the ether
defendants IN the resoluie resistance they have unit
fofmly made 10 the claim asserted by the com
plalDaDt And II Is apparent from his own iestI-
inony that nt thing short OF satisfactory assur-
ance that he would become The gamer al of
The loser, by the part Ire has acted, would ever
have operated MS an inducement 10 place himself
III Ii false position before the high tribunal whose
equitable reiet he but nomlDaliy invoked.
The complainant in thus Case sues as the only
legitimate child OF the late Daniel CLARK. who died
IN Tins cry on the 18Th OF August. 1913 She al
ses in her Bill that The said DANIEL Clark executed
VIII IN 1918, IN which he devised and 0equeatfed
all his estate, real ana personal, 10 her, the com
plaiGaIt, and "dld also therein and thereby de-
clare her 10 be has legitimate daughter, and did
make ard order therein other dispositions and be-
quests" that the will of 1913 operated full and
perfect revocation OF the former will alleged to
have been made by the said Daniel Clark IN 1911 !;
that the will of 1911 ought 10 be aside, and
the said will OF 1913 established and confirmed !;
and the real and personal estate Of said Clark de-
Glazed to be descended to her, the complainant.
"Yet," continues the bill, "your oratTix, by the
advice OF her counsel hereby declares that for the
purposes OF this suit, she will not insist npon
The said will Of the SAID Daniel Clark, made
IN 1913, except Tor the purpose Of ayaling herself
OF The devise therein contained In her favor, but
for the purpose OF avaihng herself far In law
il is competent TO do, a declaration of her ia
ther, the said Daniel Clark, Of the legitimacy OF
your Oratrix, and tor establishing her pretensIons,
in this bill set forth, the forced heiress of the
said Daniel Clark, and such forced heiress, her
rights TO The leeltime OF four.tfths of the estate Of
sad Daniel Clark which he held at his DEATH" In
preceding part Of the bill IL is alleged that the
Will Of 1913 alluded TO, was "fraudulenty con-
cealed, suppressed destroyed" by the defendant,
Richard kelf, and the revoked will Of 1911 pro-
duced and procured to be admitted to probate, as
the last will Of the said Daniel Clark. The will of
ISL is IN the following words
I'm the Name OF God, Amen, /, Daniel Clark,
Of New Orleans. do make This m last l and
Il stament:-
LIST. order that all my Just debts be paid.
"a leave and bequeath unto my mother, Mary
CiaIk, now OF Germantown, in the State Of Pean-
syvsna, all the estate, whether real or personal,
which may die possessed OF.
Sd hereby nominate and appoint my friends,
Richard Relf and Beverly Chew, my executors,
with power to settle every thing relating to my
estate New Orleans, 2slh May, 1911, Signed,
This will was duly admitted to probate, and let
ers testameniafy granted TO the executors therein
named BY virtue Of these letters testamentar and
also by virtue OF tnl power Of attorney from Mary
Clark, the sole helress and legatee mentioned ia
the Will, II is contenoed, on behalf OF the defen-
oanls 'hat the properly In controversy was sold and
purchased.
Without noticing mnuely the various allesa-
tions In the bill, and denials the answer, sha
proceed 10 examine some OF the most important
Issues which have been distinctly presented by the
pleedines and argued with great ability at the bar
The hrst and most important Of these issues, In
wolves the legitimacy OF the comp lainaat IL has
been raised by the positive denial IN the answers
OF the defendants, and II Is incumbent upon the
complainant to prove II. She alleges that her
father, Daniel Clark, was married TO Zume nee
CaiDeie, IN the city OF Philadelphia, In the year
IsU3, and that she IL the legitimate and the only
,giiimaie oiispnng OF thai marriage. The deien-
dants deny that Daniel Clark was married TO said
Zuhme at the time and place alleged, or at am
other Time or place, and they aver, that the tim
said marriage Is alleged TO have taken place the
sand Zume the W N IN I.rn H..
They also oeny that the complainant was the chill
Of Daniel Clark, and aver that if she be- she is au
aduieious bastard, and incapable Of inhertlng the
properly OF her father.
The first question to be determined is. does the
evidence on this record establish the marriage of
Daniel Cark and Lulime Cafnere IL has been
my own desire TO be relieved from the responsi-
bility Of deciding this question, by directing AN
Issue out Of chancery TO be determined by the YER
diet Of jury. / have regarded this question as
one peculiarly proper 10 be determined by a Jury.
IL is apparent 10 any one, who will look at the re-
cord that the evidence OF the witnesses ia of the
most contradictory character, and have Thought
that IN case where a conflict OF evidence pre-
ttnttd any barrier to the attainment of truth il
was peculiarly the province oi n Jury TO AID the
conscience Ut the court, by passing upon the cred-
bihty of the WITNESSES who have been examined
Ia the cause.
"When facts are to he decided" saws Greeley.
in his TIeatise on the Law OF Evidence IN Courts
Of Equity. " 522.) ~hich, from their nature. de-
mend publIclp Tor their tria as question whether
party 10 the heir al law OF Iutestale estate or
where some person Interested has d peculiar right
to The fullest investigation, (as an heir VINO Is
Questioning bill; or when the Jucge really feels
a oft Guilty too great to be removed by the mere
substitution Of the masters opinion for his own:
or where he thinks u better that the responsibility
Of d,ciolpg should be thrown from himself UPON
tbat evuhtscent Tribunal, Jury)-in these, and
other cases, the Court If EYulIy calls In aid the
Common Law tribunal, To d, clare iis opinioa oa a
matter Of Tact. some Issues have. ul late years
been granted almost OF course, az an issue 10 try
The validity OF modus, or Issue of d,risaru pel
non"
lnssmueh as il will not be in my power to avail
myself o the assistance "a jury in The present case
Tor the want Of concurrence 81 iull court IN the
necessity Of sending any OF tact out of chan
c,y, sbsll proceed to the examination Of the ,v,.
dence On the record, with that candor which the
importance OF The case go imperatIvely demands.
And shsll 90 60, fully mp. SEED with the corrpct-
ntss Of the remark OF MIR. Gresley, IN his Treause
Just cited, ". 4ts,) that "the credit which the
coufi VIII give TO the testimony Of an individual
witLess, OF 10 the whole Inass combined wares so
much, that the advsability OF examining IN. ma and
-. Is.l....