New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-11-15
rHr c4vU corYTa

In the Supreme Court, Circuit, before Mr.
Sussise SMITH, tbe importsnS s1a hts!estag ALe IRE
fGfe Of the IA Frances W Roe ct al ag Cahcis a
y Anare. The facts IN tle case Al INC tle 0 te hrst
rmns and, IN brief, those The caSo originated IN
feneral Term q Che supreme Court and sent from tho
latter the Circuit, 70 nave jury pass upon the lsshe
Plaintiff represents certain children, by his first wife OF
tames p Afiairo deceased, formerly prominent ma
shn.st ana bOeImakeT OF THIS cry Deienaaht - tno
widow aud second wife OF Mr. Alaire and bas one SON.
young man. named Hal Alaire Mr Aiaire made Til
the 8th Of ocsber 1870 shortly after inc Df,a o. h
W which he left the children Oy M is' MIC ly IL, ~
nunsber, only $50 each; toa grandehd child o. Mrs
tsS rest Of his property 10 his second wife Cgho
was made his exccatri1l ana. nx sOH han.
eft by MT Alare ws worth s2Soo that no satisfactory
eyasOn Ould be shOwu why the children by the hTst "e
~ 81 fbe uTonerv went 70 the second wife and her
that the best OF feeling existed between the chGTen ny
so,nded when the contents OF the will made known
20 them 1t COMMANDED for defendant that the property
not more than t5OF that AGre. who died June H. 1889
II the age OF 20 was, at the time OF nus death N tne u
oaessOn OF his perfectly cOgnlzant OF WHAT
be was doug when hc made his WILL and had good ana
substantial for framing as he did The case
concluded the morning OF the Sth OF the same
yonth In the summing up Of the cas- c0uhsel Oi
cutting of these children with such patty sum unless
10 show that mad taken very opportunity
10 ALLEVIATE aud esrange Are from his children by his
sened evidence showed that the conduct Of the
the first wife OF such nature as 70 alien
At the affections OF Mr. Anare and give him just cause
FOR making the win In question The jury stand
lnaniue OF the opinion that undue influence had been
used and three Of the opposite opinion The case Is nov
az for retTin Substantially the same evidence ana
h moi vet finished James T. Brady Ia counsel for plant
fR; John Graham for defendant
me guardian OF Matilda Iembke q child ak years OF
age brought suit against WIN b. DinEnore ana oIheTs
Hdams Express Company for injuries TO tho child In
April last on the sidewalk In Cedar-e It appeared That
ene Of the Express wagons was coming round the corner
81 Trinity and struck the telegraph pole az the
corner The force Of the collision caused one OF the
boxes with which the wagon was piled up 70 fall on the
child njurBg her very severely This at least together
with the that tho boxes were not properly fastened
On the wagon state Of acts presented 70 tho bu
orioT suit by the CHILD for 5000 damages for
khe injury Tbs defense did not vary these facts but
Nudge Jones de- ded that tho plaintiff could not
a. IL was contributing negligence IN tho child 70 be out IN
ke street ut al without guardian aud osrnsssd the
In tIe case Of Bishop agt. Bishop, In Superior Court,
Before Judge Barbour previously Reported tae order
ultimately entered that attachment lBsue UNLESS
lie arrears OF anm0ny for JHly we're pald up
Mr. Henry johnson, council Tor t1o Captain OF the
In the Supreme Court on NeGhesday o. q v D kooae.
ye and others against Capt GODDARD ana others Is hkey
10 the impression that three decisions have already
been made By three different Judges VI TINS oStrct ad
verse defenaaBs and holding mat the law Oi the
Legislature setting apart additional slips on tue East
kSnal The facts when fully stated viii not justify any
such impression. Mr.. johnson says: a., =, :.
Tbs ,nluncau TTahted By Nj snshes Den1,
Rer1 noo made before Mr. Jnles lnffahsn 70 nsss "
thef ngse the metou denied bet IN dJDe 'eose
b. s sAsaass nat had tks sPPBssn been nsdt 70 hn o,
fs, a tbs Injunction Be skos htsted shout erang ps
.neh - bad been esb1 and serious u could rssh se
'1" " J" eeAhnssnss psndns A. sDDsA 70 ths Sens VITA ~