New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1872-12-20
TIE Ll,MEL ESTATE CASE.

LEGAL METHODS OF ESTABLISHING A PEDIGREE.
Az the resumption. yesterday, of the trial OF
tbo ael estate case Mr. OConor fortified his position
q, Nc caincd by the citation Of several other authon-
4cs rcla 1--we 10 the nadmissbiity OF Nine JumelS al
Nod 20 the effect that she was the mother Of
III niegumate son. He said in part: The point make
isths anyone desires to establish that he is the son
Of person he must establish that As he would any
other fact.
In fine course Of MS reply, Mr. HOar spoke substan-
tlally follows:
tretened judicial decision, and 10 address the Court
snv NV learned adversary has so frequently expires
bs disgust and contempt for travelling outside Of the
,icsIoF Al issue that forced to think his urgent
I,erfsties alone have compelled nun 70 practice Nhdt
No trolesses 10 condemn. shall follow his preccps IN
sd al ms example. Because the witness by whom we
IropOse t. prove that Nine. JuInei Acknowledged mat
sbe mad had an lille gitmae comes from Saginaw, me
S-arupd coupse has talked about saginaw sad al the
atbcr awe" shall not do The evidence before the
S% ioT The defe1dant is il actual possession
of the estate IN question whether lac il mere specu-
iator who has bought IL for a song-DoiSht claims
rai1st I'd FOR the purpose of deprivng my client OF his
Yicnts and t MAKES difference whether Mime. ulnel
virtuous proud and reputable or whe,.eI sue was
vain frivolous and unchaste whether or Loo she e
r0gnzed hex relationship 10 her sou has moreover moth
ing Whatever 10 do with the adnissDtJ Oh Inaumlss
bhty OF the evidence We offer. ,-.,,- TO-.
washington Bowen the son or the Betsy bowen "h0 pc
same Mric Junel And the question before the
Court IL TINS: Are the declarations or Nine Jume
that her sou competent evidence Inere are, IN
my opinion several grounds on which th evidence can
M admitted Tie danger that some one may De lred 10
tabrcate such evidence Is an objection which may be
every kind OF evidence; and theIeOIe II Is OF
no special Importance We propose TO on r abundant
evidence Of fact that NINE. Jumel recognized the
talutn but the objection raised 10 the qlan
80 m me evidence has nothing 10 40 with It's adls
sibilify ON the simple question whether Geo. wash
ington Bowen Is Nine. Jumeps SON. think llat as
,usttcT al common sense, anyone would say inaV her
.jcciarssiou that he was her is about good
eyideuce az can be found Ingenious arguments have
hceu addressed 10 the Court some founded upon III
convenience and IuprOpIcty and some upon principles
.,iusf the aums, iby OF this evidence bat II Is upon
sound priuriprs alone that ask for its admission Now
u Is ~ spite o. ny learned friend Idct that te hlsh
81 courts Of the land have declared that such evidence
A. perfectiV competent Upon the monument or dis
,IiguIed jurst 10 ~ recorded that he went Oehlud
pr,cfdcnts to principles; ana that DOCKS were As
stead al urccedcnt that We are cOntendlnR Tor 5
fbe latter NAV he wrong, tie former Is always right.
We Offer this evidence upOu the broad pTlncpes OF the
Law Of governing pedigiet; ana We are met
with fi. novel proposition that unless you 90 fui her
back thlu mans father aud mother you dOht get INTO
Iis I,ediarcl Now, If tracing man through MS Iather
"a know what is The question In this case Is that o.
p,rcntec or descent OI the individual; aud la order TO
ascertain this fact, II - material Ia show how ne was
and treated ny those who were interested
a. him, OF sustained toward him any rela-
tioue oil blood affinity. IL was long unsettled
,lbetber aiiy. aud what Kind Of relation must
and The person whose pedigree was N question; aud
tnrr are reported in which the GeciardtOns or
sryaute and even neghbOrs and friends have been
sdlnified But II is settled that the law resorts 10
Irartay evidence Of pedigree, upon tle ground
Of be interest OF decarants IN the person IRON whOn
the sieseeht made out Inc RUE OF adnlssVh II, LeIe
Xo were related by blood marriage 10 The person.
sad therefore interested the succession IN question
Nj Chatield followed in an argument TO show that
a,d,rree may be proved by common repute and said
tlt he could find all the reports Of the state Courts
s,,iy one decision 10 the contrary.