New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-06-23

un,cemlx and the Indecent attempt was made t. thro"
prejudice over the reputation OF - Pu'e ""'s y
f. in this community, and when propose u snow
n, =, gas that that witness went upon the stand an
,wore ia sort OF leh handed way against me lu'eg
ritv of Mr. Knowlton, your Honor ruled II all out
don't suppose you will allow us tn try ms divorce case
mr. totry these family matters, but do say that the
counsel were guilty Of gross negligence IN not having
their witnesses in court. We were liable 10 the Sane
naisfor.une If we had not had our witnesses 10 tne
Court We care very little whether the case is opened
or not but there is Testimony that We would exceed
irgly ike 10 offer upon this affair. Facts nave oeen
communicated 10 us from Herkmef-'11 d
we weu,d like TO introduce. For one, w'uid eAceeu-
iney Ike 10 have the case opened upon IL, merits
NJ. Edwards-We have the right TO the last re-
bsttal +,
have e9Iy 10 say that if the woman walks the earth
who ever wrote such letter of such daughter, That
woman blasted Der own reputation oy sucn le.l-r
loud scsybing among the ladlesl The gth'leman
who ooened in regard 10 this matter remarked that you
are not asked to open the merits Of the case IL is
merely upon collateral point in tue second place
upon such collateral point so covered upeI PqTe-
upon such point that when the counsel we're met
they were taken by surprise which ought to cut them
off But II il the duty Of the Court TO see that nno
cence leaves here unwronged. Her testimony stanas
as material evidence in this caset is an element ana
how il will operate upon your Honor you do not even
yourself know. IL may be that her evidence, prop
erly restored, may turn tue case one way, ana re-
naming impeached, il now stands-prtma Jacle-lt
may turn il the other way.
The SuITogate-Perhaps, sympshlzlng somewhat
with the application, Isuggesed an informal notice 10
other side having the slightest idea that There
would be any Opposition
Judge Dean1I say that do not regard the evil
dence of Mrs Crane as at all material In this case
there il so much testimony in regard to Dr. Burdel
hostile as well as that of a more loving character
then stated what have now, that do not regard
material and if she, as lady, regard the aIo%pg
of this testimony material to her character, think
il ought to be limited to two witnesses.
The Surrogate-liere is a witness attacked without
the slightest notice. Ii this was an application on be-
~ CHI mi NOT VI a
have had four months time to get testimony and do
not think anybody has any right to complain that they
have had too short time As far as the parties are
concerned never would dream of opening this case
but confess do feel that in relation to the lady
would rather consent TO 1t.
Mr. Clinton-Would your Honor limit the number
TO two7
The Surrogate-I think not; Iwould limit it to four
Mr.. Clinton-I suppose your Honor would allow US
10 call four if we see tit. 49,
Mr. Tilden-We do not regard the testimony of Mrs.
Crane as at all material to the issue for the reason
stated by my friend Judge Dean that 1t relates e1clu
svely to point that has been covered over and over
again by witnesses who were not impeached In case
your Honor allows the motion we shall not consider
a reopepinc of the case When the Court adjourned
stated that we were willing to sum ii up as It then
stood and we are now Ii so happened that witness
who was called to testify had no opportunity to make
any defense in regard TO impeachment made 10 re-
gard 10 her veracy and it is for your Honor to decide
how far you would allow the TO be opened, to al
low her TO vindcate her character ln regard 10 open
ing il for that single purpose Why az our case stands
we deem il wholly mmateria to us. have no desire
10 have it opened We feel it would be ungracious on
our part not to give our consent to wna your Honor
considers is Justice TO the witness called here under
the mandate of the Court. We, therefore. shall give
freely our consent that the be reopened for that
purpose, and for nothing else. ~
The SurrOgate-I will consent TO IT. Will hearfour
witnesses for this lady Tuesday the 3Ch as at 10
o'clock which is the day assign for the decision In
regard to the California Commission.
orpp cur rOrrpr Hvyxo.t Trpx-IuyH 92-Refore
judges MIJfHELL, ROOSEVELT and PEABODY
SscIsIoM.,
In the matter of the First n,"snoals! Vnurch'-ihe
oaeI cSc1hIElins the award affirmed. with cos i,uart
Adene NJ Curtis agt. Joseph F. Curtis.-Juuo "ea'
Of Special Term affirmed, with costs
Chester NJ Foster agt. Dennis Acknowledgment
Aaron D. Fenton &C., agt Elias Y. Munson, &C.
judgment foI defendant affirmed with costs
Wood kc-Judgnent for plaintiff affirmed with costs
Geo w. Striker agt John H. Stnker.-Order OF
'RV Vas RsIer .~t Van Ryker.-Order for new trial,
In the matter Of the Guardianship Of Mary A.
O,s Raa ISs e dasD Of the
The People ex rel Lang agt Joseph E. Ebling The
Same sst SaneJudgment msndsmus opened aud the WI"
E5ws,d p Cowles Receiver. &c., agt. Joseph Pot
ter-Judgment fr plaintiff affirmed with costs -
The People ex rel, Roundstone agt - Henshaw
ibrahim P. Main agt John N. acknowledgement
for plaintiff affirmed with costs - ,rl:
The Mercantile Insurance Company agt' Madison
NJ Caeb-Judgmen for defendant affirmed with costs ~
Chas Z. Whitehead agt Alex. McCotter-New
trial granted, without costs Of appeal II,
Edward Beck &c. agt Jacob Rybach, &c.-Judg-
men, for plaintiff affirmed with costs H.. To
CathaIine A. Conover agt. Samuel j. Hunt, &C
Judgment for the defsndf MT . ass a win 0''
The appellant on paying the costs o. i4s Is. .nSu.
don within short ue to be Pe,eroec IN tse os
and the SoIr saSS S nj pneDed Otherwise L must stand
Miller agt. The Illinois Central katroad 20. anu
Robert and George L. schuyler 6e-New trial srsn'eai COSTS
10 abide event. Judge Roosevelt dissenting
SPECIAL TIRM-June p Before Jadee Mitchell.
PRACTICE IN PARTITION SUITS
James A. Disbrow, jr, ast. Benjamin d. Foeer, ~
The order for the appointment of guardian IN par
ttion nav be made district by Judge at CbatAbers and
II operate. a. order Of the Court -, .
there was no the upon her ana no
nen ever commenced agsius her nonresident Wnnoa
such service OF advertisement he .ouit .oau % m -. in
FAINT when suit 10 pending wherein .he mte'es ~
come m voluntarily protect her own rent. III tes s 49,
proper Officer II enough that there record evidence
Of the action and that the guardian was
S INTEREST sysr.e Ps to e infant that ppsf
only rule of Court no, stante which figures .t tS
proof essential TO jurisdiction Ihis covers tue
formal objection ,,, Al. ,.,....
sdni6stion were granted the estate of the ancestor
who owned lands that order may be obtained wth
ana that II NAV that there viii not vet
discovered These questions OF fact whcn must pe
hed beyond any doubt sssnst the purchaser or
he a. NOT hound 70 tske the titles but when they are so esso
hshed be take it, athough there may De Possoy 'ns
the result may prove 70 Dc dnse9s he wi,he. have
reference ascertain whether there are any unpaid aeo M
hsbie. Of the testsor and whether sneIe m an. NAV be- ai
CHARGED with bis but the contrary De found ne
Ss Ss.r those e@sts Is the affidavit. presented make
very probable that the finding must De senn't him. s