Weekly Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1853-1861, 1856-01-24
WfeklU gtate Sentinel.
From the New York Tdbme.l
A Strange LaWauit-

n strange Lawsuit.
A case tried during the week before Judg,
Roosevelt Oft the Supreme Court. while it exhib
ats human nature under some Of its most digust
ing aspects, conveys at the same time, som,
Important moral lessons.
The plaintiff in this case was Carolina NJ
Quimby, at the time il was commenced a wife
or at least under bonds of marriage. from which
however, within afew weeks passed she is said Il
have been released by the death of her husband
She Is still young, not above tweEty-four, the
mother Of three children. and described as Of
great personal beauty, modest demeanor, and
very winning manners. She possesses in heI
own right, a property Of near one hundred thou.
sand dollars held for her by a trustee. and
should a suit now going ON. to set aside the
will Of her grandfather, sueceed-by which
will his property was given to certain charita
bile uses-she viii become entitled. To upward
Of a quarter of a million more.
The present suit seems to have had its origin
in the following way: The plaintiff began at
the age Of sixteen, while at a boarding school
at Brooklyn, with contracting a runaway mar.
rage with her late husband, or one to which
the family only consented to prevent it from
becoming a runaway marriage. She was the
daughter Of Edward Thompson, and became
entitled under the will of her father to the
above mentioned estate, which was at first held
by her grandfather as trustee. After the birth
- hCA hAC AAA0AAN SIT ~ - hlSDstlil dlitl
went of with another man, with whom she ap-
pears to have lived for upward of a year, she
paying all the bills, and spending money at a
furious rate. The husband commenced a suit
against the paramour; but finally TO stop the
proceedings and to relieve herself from the pc
cuniary destitution to which she was reduced
her expenses far exceeding her income-she
agreed to come back and live with her husband
There being a vacancy in the trusteeship of the
property. OccasiOned by the death of her grand.
father and the failure of his executor. Mr..
Mcbride, the defendant in this suit, who was
- Rnclc, agreed To act As her trustee, and to-
u<Irk<s family, appesss ss-kaxs used
&ssfy effort to bring her back to the paths of
plspriety.
Before long, however, she quarreled again
with her husband, and eloped with one Dolsen.
who in some capacity or other had become an
inmate Of her family, with whom she appears to
have since lived, though INDUCING also at the
same time la very prOmiscuOus dissipation
Her calls for money on her uncle and trustee
We're urgent and frequent. till having already
advanced much more than had yet become due,
and perceiving the base purposes TO which the
money was put, he declined any longer To
supply her extravaganza. To frighten him in
TO submission the present suit was commenced.
10 was an application for his removal from the
trusteesliip on the ground that he had made use
Of his position TO attempt TO seduce her, with
holding her money to compel her to submit to
his wishes and the evidence relied upon to es-
tsblish this strociOus charge were the friendly
notes which the trustee had from time to time
addressed to his erring ward, partly in relation
to business. partly in hopes to win her back to
deceney, with which it was attempted to inter-
mingle two OF three slips OF paper which might
afford some slight color to the allegations of the
p a%Intiff, but which were proved not to be his
handwriting. OF course to meet this extraordi
nary charge Mr.. Mcbride was obliged to disclose
10 the Court aud the public the true character of
his unfortunate niece, who was presented by the
evidence put in As having put herself on a level
and subjected herself to some Of the horrible
evils attending on a life Of abandoned prostitu.
ton.
The counsel who appeared for the plaintiff
could scarcely have been ignorant Of the true
character Of their case and their client; and vet
as Mr.. MeBnde would yield nothing, they per
sisted in going to trial. After the second days
proceedings had been published. the plaintiff
sent a paper signed with her own name to Mr..
McBride's counsel in which she notified him
that she had Withdrawn all authority from
Messrs. Smith Il Norton, who acted as her cOun-
sci, To proceed with the suit. This paper ha-
wing bsen served upon the counsel, they pro-
eeeded 10 her boarding house, where they were
received at the door by the man Dolsen, who re-
fused to allow them to see her. However, the
hfNA ~ ~ NJ u GOulIlNtu 10 yet HCCtSS I
to her, and persuaded her TO sign a paper revo-
king her revocation and authorizing Smith 4
Norton To go on. But, pending the proceedings
the third day, DOlsen himself entered The Court !
room aid handed TO Mr.. McBride's counsel a
third paper, signed also by the plaintiff, in
which she declared that she had been compelled
by MIR. NOrtOn's threats to sign the second pa
per, and again reyOking all authority to Smith
d Norton to act for her. Mr.. Norton, being put
upon the stand. denied the use of any threats,
but only representations that to Withdraw the
suit would be to confess the truth A. of the charges
against her; and he insisted. on the other hand.
that Dolsen had, as she said, compelled her TO
sign the first paper by threats, and that he had
also compelled her TO execute a paper assigning
him the trust prOperty-the whole of he- estate
and that she had the day before accompanied
him to Wall street to sign these papers. FL
nally Messrs. Smith & Norton backed out and
abandoned their whole case, acknowledging
that the charges against Mr.. Mcbride were
wholly unfounded.
We can conceive but one reason why they
should have persisted in trying a case the result
Of which they must have foreseen. They must
have wished in a friendly spirit to bring the la
mentable case of their client, surrounded as she
is by sharpers and guilty as she would seem 10
have been of gross violations of law, to the no.
tiee OF the Grand Jury and the prosecuting
officers OF the county. Could tnything better
be done for this unfortunate young woman than
to place her in the House Of Correction, where
she would not only have leisure to reform, but
would be protected against the villains who in
flame her evil Propensities as a means of plum
dering herr And if some of the persons who
have acted a conspicuous part in contributing
to her degradation, were sent either to the
House of Correction or tho Penitentiary, we
conceive that they would do the public more
service there than they are likely to do in any
other position.