New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1857-03-25
p.ry reou., yoa ie n. prescribed By the STAT
ute In .rlsiion q the sane.
with 1e i~P-et your osedient .erysat,
IOHS A KIN1s

JOHN A KING"
The folio wing are the spsc feasiops and snswx:
The chvges End spscihcsuors are in,armiu sby
long The, sse IN brief thst he exceeded hi. power
in usirg su'hrIity tho police: IN Locking 10
Mn Cupbi gbsm. ard denying her physician pr.
Mission 20 her; IN locking NO the dsash'ers and
EckeJ ard Snoders-s. snc 10 allo~ipg inary 70 the
h. pse. that Re guilty. Of coutiDsed grsss i'm -vti-
no, ce and he~'i.dy 70 The injury o, good morals, n
t,s r,msrks 20 Msy. TO Stevens TO Hldreh to Judge
Ru.s,I 70 Dar,ef Cllm"r, and 70 the jury That 10
- rdpc,ed the ndus With view TO establish fhk
Ms Ru,d.l snd Eckel were guilty. instead OF mixing
IN in psrisl inquiry b, refusing 10 examine witnesses
10 their favor. Tbst he violated an order Of Jacgs
Bray, IN regard to the cu.tcSy o. mrs Dascen;
ard that re .peseoly vOlsed the rights OF 'nesres
Are reading TIE .f,u,e applicable to the case, M
Fell ea'lsd the frst witness; a.
S,enh.n n Mic sworn-I reside a'~-p 81 Bond
street; dentist by professions VS. pesatN ~ NC
inquest held No 81 Bona street By Dr. Connery In
February LAST; wss there nearly every Day; s'us-
I'M s would s'ay from one to forr hours escn dy
during the investigation; my wife ws exeinineo &c
witness: her nenle Is Susan G.. Maiu
Q While che Vas Oh the stand, what kind OF por'
senA obs ivsobs made to her by Cor soer Con-
rery1 A. He ssd to my wife. Do~ s time cr chsnco
for msin conques' or some'hpg t. tn st effect; the
Coroner threw bs 10 hi chair aud 10 sard
TIE reporisrs wirk.d with he right eye which go
toward me- and laughed; Coroner Conasry used othsr
poper Ddeccrops exp'essi ms TO DIN rent pes ms
all of which carrot remember nor can remember
TIE precse lsrgusge; when Hannah, the cook, ws 90
n, stand the Coroner msde remark to Der that she
carried her tail behird her, snd net before hsr,
cr words 10 trait effect; do not think oil any
ciber reusks Of a like character at present;
sftn the Coioner made tie remark about the " Msa
c,suce there w,re several bet ween the Coroner aud
IN, v.sr and ss 81 deep, most OF them su',nS
down; NE wink given nv tie roner when my ste
gsye Der psUe fereot kind Of wink nom
W ,ou--to Mr Jordsu-are giving row. the nature
the Sink SCENE. ! 70 he a cunning, sh'e< I'd siak ~
II imply that something smart hal beeo SAID ms
nature of shre~d cunning wink would be- the ciosiog
a 49,, lla. t.tr nu nf A
nj the oher; tie Coroner face nearly in full view
a. me at the time the wink given did not k'oS
J., fore WI II bis mode Of wnking sss; did not koov
Ham sh the cook until then; not seen her sincs
,e ex.uir Att she il an Irish gi wheo the Coroas,
need tha alleged Objectionable phrase be was ssypgto
her prssrg the unity she Was born N; sso ne sea
hist he was reminded OF remark Judge Ecmonos
he'd made to him, t. the effect that II truth ws
vented it could be got fom an ltish servant gui,
words - that Effect
The Court then adjourned till Thursd ~ at 10 o'clock
sURROGATE's COURT-MARcR s4-Before A. W.
bRADFosD.
THE BACH wuL-PRIscIPIEs ON WHICH THE QUEs-
TIoS OF INSANITY EXAMINED.
In the matter proving the last VIII and Testament Of James
Bach. .
TIE SuRRoGATE.-The decedent died in this city
on the 3st OF October 1885, having executed on the
2sih of the preceding April the will presented FOR
probate which devices and bequestbs all bis property,
reel and personsl to Mrs. Margaret Gumbsut and
MIS- Margaret MoDtfOrt two widow ladies vito whom
he had been residing for number OF years. IL does
not appear thst the decedent lett any heirs or kndsed,
and The will has been contested by the Public Admo,
istrstor cp behsfof the City and the Attorney Gener
On behalf of the Sste in case OF al e-cneat IN ue-
fail, Of a valid Parliamentary provision 49,
The decedent sbont 20 years of age; his health
had bee de- cir some time before his decease: he bad
been mostly confined to his house 10 consequences o.
Increasing debility and the effects OF si recsea IN
December 1855 For several years he hsd been en-.
tirely deaf ard hs friends ordinarily CON nuocs'ed
with rim in writing biz answers being given snd con-
versation continued on his part, orally. He's repre-
sentec a. persoo OF great intelligence and acqdre
meBfs fond OF OBSCURE and habiiusted TO enuuciafe
readily in the msrper described.
At tho time If the execution Of the will the ques
tiop written on Site "Do you wish e. mako
your will now" He nodded In approval. He then
read the instrument and agais nodding approval pro-
ceedfd TO sign il He then asked ON the slate,
"Js tbis your wiF to which he signd-d ASCENT BY
noddirg and requested two of the three subscribing
Witnesses 70 spn They did so in his presence, and
thus all the formal ceremonies were accomplished.
Even in default OF proof Of srpeci6c request, n point
of form he ri was sufficiently executed
. Did the o.cedert have Efficient capacity to per-
form tes'au entsry act At the time of the execution II
this instrument u is alleged by the con'sants that
be ess geDeall Incompetent and especially about
ibe period of the celebration of this will was In state
of mtB'sl derargen emit
The Suyroe ae reviews and discusses the evidence on
this point The est If which have published from
time to time with great and minuteness and
sfrlves at the following conclusion:
III percent ChSf, giving thc eFpeuCo VI tno WIZ
resses for The contestants all the weight claimed keep
irg iD mind the uncertainty TO the time Of the
repces to which they speak have proof Of capacity
shortly before and for long time afterward. Tbs ear
lier symptoms of the indicated indeed. torpid
rather then inegusr abnormal mental action; inert
rather than aoerraton
Alter 9 careful consideration Of all the evidence
duly comparing ard weighing the whole, | am ssfs6ed
there perio DIS ser the Accession Of the nfrmy
and for weeks after the date Of this will when
the deceden hsd the requisite degree Of capacity for
the execution OF valid instrument But in view OF all
the circumstances and proofs the apprehension existing
tim OF the paper ny the parties benefited by its pro-
visions I ON bound to proceed with caution and cir
cumsptcton and particularly 10 inquire whether tho
coLens If the instrument hsrmoDze With the state Of
the decedeDts affections and intentions.
On this point the evidence is, on examination, 70
eardtd clear and ssftfsctory In support Of the will
On the whole, the Surrogate concludes, In view Of
the intimate relations between the decedent and the
two Iegatees ard bis declarations In their favor; 10
view Of the fact that the contest being between such
persOns and the State and City, no presumption
should be INDUCED gainst the validity Of the instru-
menf. eIctp, such facts clearly proved compel the
" Court 10 entertain" Ia view Of the act beius
reasonable and nationally performed, thst 1t 10
bis duty 10 pronounce sentence Of probate Decree
accordingly.
SUPREME COURT cIRCUIr-MAscH 2L-Bsfors Judge
PEABODY.
DIVORCE SUIT.
James T. Smith agt. Emily A. Smith.
This s the nsiest action for divorce that has fallen
within our observation. The complaint charges that
the parties married in March, l843, 10 Boston,
whence they moved to this city in March 1885, on Tie
25ih Of ~hich month the plaintiff suspected HE vice