The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1873-02-11
THE COURT S.
TIE JUMEL ESTATE CASE.
The Long Suit Coming to Close At Last
Summing Up for the Defendant--Ar.
gument To Be Continued To-Day.
The RosenAwefS Case in
the General Sessions.
TIE JUMEL ESTATE CASE.

Ss~~S~s
The Suit Of Bowen vs.. Chase-The Re-
butting Testimony for the Plaintiff
Understanding Up Of Mr.. j. G..
Carter for the Defendant.
The hearing Of the case Of George W. Bowen w.
Nelson Chase was resumed yesterday In the United
States Circuit Court before Judge Shipman and
the special jury.
Mr.. Hoar, Mr.. Chatfeld, Mr. Chauncey Shafer
and Mr.. Sawyer appeared as counsel for the plain
tiff, and Mr.. Charles OConor and Mr.. J. c. Carter
for the defendant. rEl
DEPOSITION OF GIDEON J. TUCKER.
Mr.. Carter continued to read to the jury the
cross-examination OF Gideon J. Tucker in his depO
siton, as taken In the progress Of the present
trial. Tucker states that he had an interview with
Joseph Perry at o house in Brooklyn. and was
brought to him by detective named Wells. Tucker
wanted, he said, to have Wells keep an eye on
Perry, so that he might have the latter arrested
and prosecuted Tor perjury. The reason he did not
have Perry arrested Immediately after the COMMITS
sion OF the perjury was that the perjury was COM.
mitted In Rhode Island.
TESTIMONY OF COMMISSIONER SHIELDS.
Mr.. John A. Shields, United States Commissioner,
deposed that April rs 1872, Mr.. Tucker swore an
afdavit before him; on that occasion Mr.. Shields,
Mr.. Tucker and Mr.. Sharer went before
Judge paws, the United states District . Attor;
among them that, as the offence 1.-THE perjury by
Perry had been committed in Providence, the
warrant for his arrest should have been issued
there; Judge Davis said that that was the proper
course, and ne lMr. Shields had doubt that he'
son had spoken to him on the matter until day or
two ago, when Mr.. shaifer asked him to bring the
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM n. CRYSTAL. 49,
william H. CRYSTAL clerk in the Tax once Of ths
for 1872 had not been paid
DEEDS PUT IN EVIDENCE.
ev 9a o put Ella b
others to Nelson Chase.
The plaintiff here rested his case.
After discuss 1t was agreed on both sideS'
that two counsel should address the jury for each
party, Mr.. j. G. Carter to begin for the defendant,
and that gentleman to be followed by one Of the
counsel for plaintiff, who will be succeeded by Mr..
OConOr for defendant, leaving the last word to-
Judge Shipman said that, in view OF the multi
plicty Of matters involved in the evidence, he
should consume in summing up.
SUMMING UP BY MR.. ]. c. CARTER FOR THE DEFEND.
After the recess at two O'Clock, Mr.. J. G. Carter
proceeded to sum up the case on behalf OF the de-
iendant., He said he would be as brief as the ma
the patience which the jury had exhibited all along
would be extended to him in his argument. He
would have to go into variety OF details. He.
would have to show the circumstances under which
this case arose. Madame Jumel was woman fond
afterwards obtained divorce from him. This
gave her great nOtorietv. She was introduced
lnLO society III fTduCe as LHe WluOW VI AAIOk
Burr, vice President of the United States At
the time she made the will OF 1868 there was not q
it was then well known that the children Or Mr.
Chase were her legitimate heirs. Notwithstanding
that fact Madame made will cutting Off the Chases
from the inheritance. suit was instituted to-
break the will, and Messrs. Martin and Smith made
inquiries as to whether there had been persons
nearer to Madame in relationship than the ChasesS
but they could find none. Mr.. Devine, OF that firm,
as early as 1866, went to Providence and called
upon persons OF the name or Bowen to come for
ward and state IL they were related TO Betsy
Bowen, afterwards Madame jumeL There were
him, Bowens at the right OF him. Mr.. Devine went.
a. the spggSe sdo of of a,s MT 1.tte Potter to
knew nothing Of Betsey Bowen, and as to Madame
Jumel he said he knew nothing OF her except what
ne IL 0 ts 5
1910 or 1917 This was Mr.. Jumel's property,
which he subsequently settled upon Madame
Jumel, the adopted child of the Jumels and her
heirs. The nominal defendant in this case was
Mr.. Nelson Chase but he and his two children held
litigation. Counsel then gave history Of the
Bowen family. He alluded to the evidence OF Mrs..
rrancke, who, ne said, produced the commissions
Of Jonathan Clarke, and thus connected MrsI Maria
the learned gentIeman's argument he dealt at length
in comments upon old records produced In the
case He commended that those records made OUT
and Mrs. Maria Jones. In the year 1904, Betsy
Bowen, who was woman OF great personal at
fractions, married Stephen Jumel and went TO re-
side with him at % Whitehall street, rem aiming
there until 1910 or 1911, when they went TO reside
at the Mansion. Mary Jumel was living with the
Jumels as their adopted daughter ana she married.
Mr.. Chase in 1882. According to all the evidence
who was called Mary Jumel, was the daughter q
Maria Jones by husband prior to her marriage
Jones had previously married some worthless fell.
low, who had deserted her, and that Mary Jumel
was a daughter Of that marriage. Mary Jumei had
children OF their own and throughout the whole
trial it was clear that the intention OF the Jumels
uroo DO Mo linn Nru NhnoaN eh.s~ hasx
Eventually the property was conveyed to one
Michael Workmaster in 1921 to be held in trust for
anne Jumel. But in 1928, when Mr. Jumel returned
from France, another deed OF appointment, under
erty in Mary Jnme and her heirs after tie death Of
the Jumels. But Madame Jumel had reserved to
herself the power OF Changing that by ncr WIN, WIN;
of Madame Jumel's death she would nave been
entitled under r se deeds to inherit the property.
roundnrs of the case, that the fixed Intention OF
the Juines was to leave the inheritance Of the
will drawn by Madame Jumel In 1916, conlending
that that will was further indication OF the intcn-
tiCn of the Jumes to confer the estate upon Mary,
for whom they had always expressed the greatest
afiectlon. The marriage settlement entered into
tHs mr. Perry made en
ton still clear. But 1t was evident that four
or five years before kadame5 death she was In
sane and had been, when in that state, In the habit
ofpouring out abuse against VIM. Chase. Evidence.
Mas Sa on @ IN 20
to Mr.. Chase and the members or his family. The
defendant never denied that, but when Madame
Jumel so expressed herself was she giving utter
ancc to her real sentiments Was she rather not
person whose reason was unsettled and whose
Judgment had been dethronedS 1t had been IN
sisted on the other side that Madame Jumel had
been brought up among prohlgate people and had
not cvinced great purity of life. Now, in answer
to that he would say, let them look at the way in
which Mary Jumel had been brought up 6y Madame
Jumel Mary Jumel's letters breathed the most
pure and tender sentiments, and, though tho
literature was not always OF the highest style, It
invariably exhibited purity OF thought and kind
ness Of disposition.
journed till this morning when MI. Carter viii.
continue his argument
BUSINESS IN THE OTHER COURTS.