The New York herald., 1871-03-26
SUPREME C0URT-ClRCUlT.
Argument for n New Trial in the Hogan
Will Case.

Will Case.
Before Judge Sutherland
Sarah c. Hatch Us. clara III. Peugnet ct dl.-The
argument of the motion for new trial upon the
Judges minutes came up yesterday morning. The
Judge stated previous TO the opening that his mind
was pretty clear as to his want OF power to entertain
Or grant this motion at this time and suggested that
the proper way to raise the question would be by
preparing case and exceptions and making thei con
D motion for q new trial. Still he was willing to
hear what counsel for the defendants had TO urge In
supporting their theory to his Jurisdiction in en-
Pertaining the motion. He added that he
had come TO the conclusion stated after
conference with his associate judges. Counsel for
the defendents avaied themselves OF the oppor.
tunlty ol1ered them 10 argue their side OF the case
and did so at considerable length II was insiste Il
that the Court had jurisdiction to entertain the
motion, ana Ill favor oil the motion 1t urged thai
In reference to Dr. Peuguet Influencing Mrs. Hogan
IN making her will and in the execution Of the deeds
dsposng OF her properly the verdict OF the jury had
not so much as suspicion, much less, proof to rest
upon; that he married his wife at the time he did
under the advice OF Mr.. Thebona who very emphatl-
cally stated, when ON the stand that he thought
owing TO Mr.. Hatchs relations to the Hogan family
they needed protector; that at the reading Of the
Mr.. and Mrs. Hatch fully and freely exonerated
Dr. Peugnet from all connection whatever with the
disposition made BY Mrs. Hogan OF her property;
that DR.. Peugnet induced Mrs. Hogan las she her.
self stated TO destroy the viii OF April 1872 giving
CARA all her property, as unjust which, according
u
favor as 10 the VIII; That person under law is
al fu liberty TO dispose OF his her estate TO such
person as he or she sees t that the burden OF es-
taDlshlng undue influence rested upon the party by
whom 1t was alleged; that this undue influence
cannot be presumed, but must be proved to have
been exercised, and exercised In relation to the
VIII Itself, and not merely other transactions; that
even though the jury may not or do not perceive
why the testatrix was induced discriminate In her
Will so uDfavorably against her daughter Sarah
that fact alone not sulcent to establish tnat her
Will was not her free and voluntary act; that
whether Mrs. Hatch Is a wronged or injured woman
depends upon the standpoint from which she ia
viewed, and that Mrs. Hatch's memory was not alto
Beter perfect as shown, particularly regards the
verbal agreement for the purpose Of enabling the
cnIdren TO enjoy the stock against the creditors
the whole stock as against the creditprs but as be-
tween her and the children she should give them
al up after the payment OF debts aud this
SzVVo IL was urged, IN conclusion, that the
most arocious mater OF this, motion was that
shoud the present findings be adopted as
Tue oasis OF the ultimate judgment OF the
court Mrs Hatch would get third OF the interest
Ars. feugnet voiuntarly surrendered to ner
mother Ia the Madison avenue, Macdoupal street
and Clinton place property. 1t was urged In con-
cluson, tnat the effort 10 DESTROY tins viii and deed
by linking Nellie with Mrs. Hatch was too transna
rent, as Nellie needed no pecuniary remembrapce
from her mother the religious sphere to which she
mad devoted bersei not requiring It. Il was further
urged that evident bias or the Jury, either ara,nct
stract, and that certain erroneous rulings of the
Judge, 70 which exceptions were duly tax en- were
sufficient grounds Tor granting new trial. In the
absence or Judge Pferrepont, senior se for the
plainttn, it was finally arranged that points nm
answer might be submitted within three days.