The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-12-14
THR WINTER LUNACY CASE'
WHO II A SCoUNDREL7
Charges Of Corruption and Fraud Against
Judge Barnard.
THEIR REPUTATION AND REITERATION.
Spicy Developments History Of
tho Case.
SUPREME cOuaI-cHAMBsas.

SUPREME COUaI-cHAMBEas
Before Barnard.
In the Natter OF rser to appoint a r-us-
tee.-It appears By p4pgls as well as the state
ment OF counsel IN case that william Winter.
the son Of Gabriel l.l! deceased inherited from
his father an estate about $175OOO in real estate
in the counties of New York and Queens yielding
an annual income OF $4,000 to $4,000. Tho
other half OF the property belonged TO the chill
drcn of bis deceased sister, the vile OF John
Livingston, lS4 West Fourteenth street. and
was inherited by her two sons, Mortimer ana Henry
W. Livingston. 1t Is alleged that by fraud, trick
and device John Livingston managed, with Daniel
c. BirdsalI, to have q trust deed made IN 1858 TO
Daniel G. Birdsa ~ trustee with the remainder Of
the property to his children, he to receive the rents
issues and profits OF lis estate from this trustee
during his natural life Brdsal and Livingston then
agreed upon amicable partition Of the property,
to divide the income equally, and 30 the matter
ran along for period OF about six years, when Will
liam Winter employed Mr.. II. p. Herdman as his
counsel to try and eject the removal of Blrdsall and
to have DR.. Francis william Hartley appointed
trustee in his stead. Mr.. Herdman, before COM
menclng the necessary proceedings. thoughtit ocss
to see Mr. Livingston, for which purpose he called
on him at his home where as alleged. Mr.. Living
scoundrsl,n and desired to have the privilege OF
assisting him (Herdman) in turning Birdsa out and
putting DR.. Hartley in his place. Win this object in
view since the middle OF last November papers have
been preparing ct his house covering nearly 900
folios got up, a. alleged by Livingston, to show
Judge Barnard to be . man OF the vilest character.
IL further appears that when Livingston loun0
that Judge Barnard was to hold the special term OF
the Supreme Court and that 1t was before him tho
motion should come a few days preceding he com.
menced abusing Judge Barnard to MY. Herdman and
Dr. Hartley, stating that he the judge had deceived
him before-that he was "d--n sc0undrsp'-thas
he Judge Barnard} came to him and told him TO
make application to him to have Birdsall removed
and he would appoint the City chamberlain in his
place. but 50 far from doing that Judge Barnard took
the pap ers and appointed young clerk in the once
Of John B. Haskin receiver pende'te Hte'n, and,
nnally John b. Haskin as trustee. Finally, the case
came up to the Court OF Appeals as reported In the
thirty fourth Of New York reports. Before, how
ever they got rid or John b. Haskin as claimed he
hat appropriated the income OF Mr.. Winter, who
his brotherin-law, to the extent OF about 1900,
before could be got out OF his hands. An order to
show cause, drawn by Livingston was next OBJ
tanned from Judge Ingranam for the first Monday o.
the present month, which was served on Birdsal BY
one OF Livingstone young men. In this way MT.
case from the mouth Of Blrdsall, who insisted That
he was willing ana ready at any time to resign
that erect. 1t Is charged that Living.
StOn kept up such constant stream OF
as 70 eat up the entire income, leaving Winter IN
debted to him some s. 600 or $40 900 In consequence
Herdman informed Livingston OF the Interviews be-
tween himself and Blrdsall, aud OF the atters will
liugness to resign Livingston rephed that mas
much as Barnard was on the bench. Il aerdman
they could como before the court on common
petition have Hartley appointed IN his stead, and
hardly appoint one Of hs own political friends as
he had been in the habit OF doing. Herd
imam ma os sSce5sinT5 With
Livingston, made the order appointing Hartley and
waited upon Judge Barnard, before whom he made
. motion for the appointment OF Hartley on the
esgnatlon OF Brdsall and on the withdrawal OF the
proceedings already taken. Judge Barnard took the
tracts from an afldavit in his possession. lie then
read extracts showing that Dr. Hartley had called
a% udgs cos0ss Villain 10
know who had made such an afldavit,
and was informed John Livingston and mis-
IN every particular stating that Livingston himself
had drawn all the papers even the order for the APP
pointment OF Hartley; that he was constantly urging
moton: that Hartley had in cOunsers presence
never made use OF any such expressions but on the
contrary, had ever spoken In the highest terms Of
Judge Barnard. On this Judge Barnard TOOK the
papers, saying he would take action on them another
Yesterday morning DR.. Hartley came into court
with the aiidavlts OF II. p Herdman and
also or his own wife, denying all the allegations in
reference to Judge Barnard and stating tnaJ Living
ston himself was the man who had used the express
sionB placed In Hartiey's mouth that on Thursday
last Mr. Livingston called ut Mr.. Herdman's office;
that there was only slight partition separating that
Office from room adjoining; that Hulett overheard
conversation between Hartley, Heraman and John
Livingston. In which the latter abused Judge Bar
nard In the most terrible manner saying that he
w n q
him IN the Haskln matter; that he had no conf
dence In him; that Ira Shsfer was his (Barnard'sl
rlghthand man and could do with him a.
he pleased. and did do it; tnat Judge Barnard and
Ira Shater had been out sleighrding together;
not doing anything--in other words for not oppos-
Ing the other party before Judge Barnard, but
could not say that ali this time both Herdman and
Hartley told MN he must be mistaken, that they
had every confidence In Judge Barnard and were
determined TO bring this motion before him; that
they considered Judge Barnard, Notwithstanding all
that was said against him, as just and upright
and Hartley were invited by Livingston to take din
ner at his house; they declined, but agreed 10 Do
erS a. seven ,n ina. aaes came mere =, ana
to Judge Barnard In presence OF his two sons; that
on Sunday Livingston and his son Mortimer called
Herdman ut his house, 1856 Ainsley street. Brook
iyn, and Herdman refused TO communicate with
them; that Livingston stated Herdman was laboring
under great mistake, which he wanted to explain;
that Herdman asked him to explain how it was that
he and bis two sons had made an AFFIDAVIT charging
Francis w Hartley with using the language sscriDed
TO him, when he knew that he tLiNngstoR) was the
only man who used such expressions, and
that they were. negatived by both Herdman and
Hartley in the presence OF his sons; that on
the same evening John Livingston was at Hartley's
house. No. rs East Ninth street until eleven
o'clock at night and In the presence OF hts wife
and Hartley repeated the statement against
Judge Barnard, declaring thai he would not have
the motion como before MIN in any event.
Judge Barnard said he did noe consider he could
be injured by any such allegations at all.
Counsel insisted that they were brought IN qucs-
tlOn and asked for reference inquire fully into