Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1871-10-14
An Important Will Case i'm Chicago.
ONE OF THE RoMANCEs OF The LAW.
The Wife IF the Rebel General Simon BoIirar
BHokH6r Receives I 200 600.
From the Chicago Tribune, Oct.

The Wife IF the Rebel Gsf.eraI Simon BoJ,ror
BHokner Receives 81 900 600.
From the Chicago Tribune, Oct7.l
An imICrt.nt Gaze mas been decided by the
SUI I,Ele Court affecting the owner Ship CT an
the real state which IS knowIs as tn Ein,Shurv
estate. and divides that estate between the heirs
Ot HajOr Julius j. Il. kiIlssbury. Eestor n TO
Ma, X. Buckner on,-half iHteres, Ia the nFSp-
erty OF which her father died possessed. The
property consists OF lois : and in block IS.
original town, The site of Woods Museum, anu
the block Of buildings running north from Ran
dolph street TO the alley midway to Clark, for
mcrly occupied by the Tribune, as well as an Of
that part OF the cast half Of the northwest quar-
ter of section g. in township 80 north OF range "A
east =. H., which lies east OF ;he north branch
of the Chicago river and south OF the center OF
Ontario street. The vaiue of the propartv NAV
be tsumat1L st over one million Of dollars The
estate Thy the receiver, John Wooslhridge.)
about week sTIce purchased the building on
tie south Clark stree; front for s2l.GJO.
Julius j. II. KInEsbuTy, who owned the prom
erty, died on the 2Gth day of June leaving 10
survive him widow, Jane G. KiaESbry and
two children, Mary Il. BuckEer, wife of Sim IN
B ST E9ekner, Of Kentucky, an Gy.e.ficer Of
the confederate army, and Henry w. Kinsburv
TO these the property descended, dover to the
widow ard the fee to the children as tenants in
common: The son, Henry W, a lieutenant IN
The United States service, married one Eva
Taylor, on the 4th day Of December 1851 The
estate was managed by General Burnside i'm the
interest OF the parties until the war broke out.
When the rebellion commenced Buckner. living
IN kentUcky, and being a hrigadier OF the militia
OF that State, under Governor MaCofin. desired
by some means to preserve to his wife her Chi
cago property. the more especially as hc being
ABOUT 10 join the rebel army feared that contis-
cation would follow. Henry w. Kingsbury be-
ingin the United States army as a lieutenant.
ana being north OF Mason and DiXOn's line, OBJ
tanned permission to join the forces OF Connect
cut, and attached himself to a regiment of its
troops as colonel. Fearing this confscaton by
reason OF her husbands disloyalty, Mrs. Buck
ner, on the 18th day of MAY, 1861, Joined her
husband in deed, absolute upon its face CON
yeylng her interest in all the property which, had
9escended to her. The war progressed until the
l.th day OF September, 1862. when. at Antietam
henry W. kingsbury was killed. Three months
less one day, after he had died, there was born
to him posthumous child. WIN received his
1athers name. On the 26th day OF September
1865, the widow Eva married. accepting Albert
husband.
=, In the year 1899 the estate came into litigation
1t was managed without legal authority, by an
agent, Tor a number of years, until the then
Judge Bradwell stirred about to see that the
pI9bate law was obeyed. Their of this was,
at last that in 1869 proceedings were had to con-
duct matters according to law. As conse-
quence Of that litigation, which was probably
amieable, there was decree entered of record
which found the title in the poSthumous child
subject to the dover rights of his mother and
grandmother. To their uses and the cancella-
ton OF membranes the income OF the estate
has ever since been appropriated.
In the course Oft time 1t came to be learned that
upon the eve of his departure TO the battle field
OF Antietam Lieutenant Henry w. Kingsbury
colonel Of v0lunteersl hadleft in the hands of a
Inend paper which he supposed to be a will.
In this document he stated that he then expected
''soOn TO start upon military eXpediti lion where
Death might overtake him; wherefore he left a
record OF his wishes respecting the disposition
OF his property, bequeathing to his mother Chi
cago property of the value of S20, 900; to his
sister, Mrs Buckner, some third of the property
In the city OF Chicago, ILL.,, left by my father,
Julius j. B. Kingsbury, deceased" to a cousin
5000 and some realty at Waterbury, Conn.
with tie residue to his then wife. 1t also came
in the family, SO that Major General Ambrose
r.. burnside, known to be named as executor
could not obtain 1t until, by some stringent
means, he procured an order in the Surrogate's
ONCE OF New York, which brought it forward.
When the supposed will was proved to be in
existence 1t was caused to be prObated in the
corporation court of the city of Alexandria, in
TO this State and county and duly recorded.
The legal aspect of the ownership of the
estate began now to be changed, and shortly
after Mrs. Buckner set up her claim for an undi-
vided half of her fathers estate Claiming that
her deed, absolute upon its face, was but a deed
In trust, TO prove which she presented the sup
p pua VIII IN testimony, alleging that the be-
according to the mind Of her brother, who was
untutOred in law. and, therefore, had supposed
that he, she and their mother each were entitled
10 an undivided third Of the whole estate. The
defendants, the kingsburys, answered. DENYING
the validity of the will and setting up the con,
1eyancing OF 1861 as an absolute deed. The
complainant, Mrs. Buckner, however, claimed
nothing OF the supposed will, but that it was a
declaration OF trust, executed by her brother,
with view to restore to her what she supposed
20 be her proper share of their fathers property
In the Circuit Court there was no hearing of
the case. BY agreement of COUNSELLOR the
Buckners, Messrs. Beckwith, Aver & Kales-
TOOK decisson pro Tormd dismissing Mrs Buck
ner's bill, and at once proceeded to the January
term Of the Supreme Court, sitting at Spring
neld. The case was argued during that month
and now the decision lie filed.
The decision finds that the deed of Mary X
Buckner was, in fact, deed of trust, wherefore
that she Ia the owner Of the undivided half of
the property known as the Kingsbury estate. A
copy OF the decision has not yet been received,
nor has the clerk Of the central district an,
nounced that it has been filed, but it is under
stood That the cause fell to the lot of Judge
NcAu'ster, from this district, to write.