The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1871-10-10

Tho Wife Of tho Rebel General simon BoIi-
yer Buckssr Receives $1,000, 900 kemi-
rnIcaucaa IN xv..

nicences Of the war.
From the Chicago Tribune, Oct. II
An important case has been decided by the Su-
preme Court affecting the ownership all the real
estate which Is known as the Kingsbury estate, and
divides that estate between the heirs or Major Julius
]. u. Kingsbury, restoring TO Mary X. Buckncr ono
naf interest in the property OF which her father
died possessed. The property consists OF lots and
In block IS, original town. the site OF Woods Mu-
scum, and the block OF buildings running north
from Randolph street to the alley midway to Clark,
formerly occupied by the Tribune, well as oil or
that part OF the east half OF the northwest quarter OF
section o. IN township 80, north Of range ii east p
m, which lies east OF the north branch the Chicago
River and south OF the centre OF Ontario street.
The value or the property may be estimated at
over one million OF dollars. The estate iby the
celver, john Woodbrdge, about a week since, pur.
chased tine building on tho South CLARK street mont
Julius J. B. Kingsbury, who owned tho property,
died on the 2otu day OF June, 1864 leaving to sur
vlve him o widow, Jane q. Kingsbury and two
children Mary X. Buckner wife OF simon bolivar
federate army, and Henry W. Kingsbury 10 these
the property descended dover to the widow and
son, Heny w., lieutenant In the United States
service married one Eva Taylor, on the 4h day or
cral Burnside In the interest OF the parties until the
war broke out. When the rebellion commenced
Of the Militia o that state nnder aoveor Maxc
desired by some means TO preserve to ms vile her
chicago property, the more especially as he beng
ton would follow. Henry W. Kingsbury being in
the United States Army as lieutenant, and being
MISSION TO join the forces or Connecticut, and
attached himself TO regiment o. IT'S troops
OF her husbands disloyalty, Mrs. Buckner. on
the 18TH day OF May, 1851 joined her nus and IN
in ali the property which mad descended to her THO
war progressed until the l7th DAY Of September,
l.oA wnen, at Ant,etam, Henry "; Kingsnnry was
died, there was born. 10 MIN posIhumous child
VINO received his fathers name: On the 10Th day
of september, .665, the widow Eva remarked, ac-
cepting Albert q. Lawrence, then general Ia the
army as her husband
was managed without legal authority, by an agent
for number or years, until the then Judge Brad
obeyed. me result OF this was, last, that 1859
proceedings were had to conduct matters accord.
ing 70 law. AS consequence OF that litigation,
which was probably amicaDle, there was q decree
entered OF record Which found the title the post.
humous child, subject to the dover rights or mis-
mother and grandmother. 10 their uses and the
cancellation Of membranes the income Of tho
estate has ever since been appropriated.
In The course OF time 1t came 10 10 learned that
upon the eve OF hs departure to the battle field or
Ant etam Lieutenant Henry W. kingsbury colonel
OF vuluncers had lett IN the hands OF friend o
paper which he supposed to be will. In thl,
document lie stated that he then expected "soon to
start upon q Military expedition where deaIn',
might over,ake him. wherefore he left II record OF
his wishes respecting The disposition OF his pro.
perry, Bequealnlng to his mother Chicago property
'.one-tnird Of the property In the CITY OF Chicago,
H. lett 10y my father, julius J, Il. KlngSDury, de-
ceascd;n to a COUSIN $4,000 aud some realty at
waterbury, Conn, with the residue To his hen wife.
IL also came 10 be knowd tnat this paper all Deen
witnneld IN the family, so thar MaJos General AM
brose r. Burns de, known TO be named AS eXecu or,
could not ob,am It until, ~ some stringent means,
he procured an order IN. the Surrogaies Office OF
New York, wnrch brought IL forward
" hen the supposed Will was proved 10 be IN cx.
istence t caused 10 be probated III the Corpora
ton Court OF the cit OF AeSandria, IN the state OF
virginia, and the record was brought to tnl5 state
and county and duly recorded.
The legal aspect OF tho ownership of tho estate
began now TO be changed, and shortly after Mrs.
BuckIor set up ner claim Tor an undivided half OF
her iathers estate claiming that her deed, ABSOLUTE
upon its face. was but q deed IN trust 10 prove
winch sue presented the supposed Will iii testimony,
alleging that the beduest to mr. was pur the tulul-
ment of the trust according 10 the mind oil her
brother VINO Was untuLofed In law, and, therefore,
had supposed that he. she ana their mother each
| were entiled 70 an undivided third o. The whole
estate. TIE defendants, the Kingsburys ans vered
denyigg the validity OF the viii ting the
conveyance Oh 1881 as absolute deea he complain
ant airs. Buckner however, claimed notnin OF the
supposed WILL but mat II was declaration OF trust
executed ny her brother with view To restore 10
what he supposed TO be her proper share oil their
| fathers property.
In the Circuit Court there was no hearing OF the
case. BY agreelnent or COUNSELLOR the Buckners,
Mcssrs. GOudy & Chandler, and for the kingSburgs,
Messrs. BecSwith Aver & Kalcs-toOk decision
pro fOl-na, di3msSiug Mrs. Bnckners bill and at
once proceeded 70 the January tern oil The Supreme
Court. sitting az Springfield The case was argued
during that month and now the decision is filed.
The decision finds that the deed OF Mary X. Buck
was IN fact. deed or trust wherefore that she
- the owner OF the undivided half OF the property
known as the Klngsoury estate. copy OF the de-
cison has not yet been received. has the Clerk
OF the Central District announced that IL has been
fled out &c Is understood that the fell the
lot OF Judge McAliiste from this District TO wrte