New-York tribune., 1873-02-21
THE PROCEEDINGS.


The most interested, excited and yet orderly,
audience that has filed the United States Circuit court
room during tho years assembled yesterday, to
listen TO Judge shlpmans charge to the special or
struck" Jury in the celebrated Jumel estate case.
The half-suppressed murmur OF excitement which
greeted the entrance Of the Judge having subsidized Mr.
Chated presented 40 points upon which he asked that
the jury should be specially charged but Judge Ship
man said that they contained merely questions OF
fact he should decline 20 discuss them He then dev-
cred his charge the jury Of which the essential por
tiOns will be found below;
JUDGE sHIPMAN's CHARGE.
GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY: This novel and important
case which has long occupied your attention Is now
TO be submitted to your Judgment for determination.
Before finally committing 1t to your hands it proper
FOR me to call your attention of its leading fea
lures as disclosed by the evidence and TO the claims OF
the parties neither practicable nor necessary for
me to go at length into al the details OF the evidence
Before dong SO. however, will explain to you what
the question ia.
FIRST The property embraced in this suit Cbeing all
reaestate was originally purchased by stephen Jumel
and conveyed 10 him. II cannot be doubted, upon the
facts in proof that paid for by him, with his own
money and that he became the sole owner both In law
and equity
Second Prior to the 18th OF May, 1929 Mr. Jume gave
his wife, Eliza B. Jume, a power Of attorney author
zng her to transfer the entire property except the
homestead which had before been conveyed to trustees
for her benefit to whom she might see NJ and under
- T,o to,,osto,l v-os oso conveyed direction
OF Nine Junel 20 Mary prior TO May -. 1928 The lat
fer therefore on the day last named the and
held the legal title 10 the whole property.
Third On that day May l3, 1929 Mary Jumel Bownes
conveyed the entire property Michael Werckmeis
ter upon certain trusts follows: l. 1hat he should
collect the rents and profits ana pay over he same 10
to possess and the property collect the rents her
self the to be for her sole and separate use p
That he should convey the property to any sueh person
OF persons, at such time and upon such conditions as
Nine Jumel should by any instrument In writing exc
cued the presence OF any two credible witnesses or
der direct limit, and appoint In case she ordered an
absolute sale he was to pay the purchase money
20 Nine Jume or invest the same as she should Order
and direct AT the decease OF Nine Jumel he was to
convey 70 her Hes Ine ehe esaCo ny NV mso us
posed Of or controlled by the exercise OF me power con-
erred upon her by this deed OF trust In snort TINS deed
IN trust % Nerc1mel3ter rom M..y Jt%me' % nO%nss'
secured % Mime Jume lte interest ~ thls propery,
and In addition conferred upon her what is known in
law as power OF appointment ThIeh lseo1ea d d the
prescribed formaes This trust deed also secured the
Yided sIe made no other or different disposition OF it
under the power of appointment embraced in the trust
after the 18th OF May, 1928.
Fourth On the lat of November 1923, Mime. Jumel ex-
ercsed the rights Tor at least some ot the conferred
upon her by this power OF appointment in the deed to
Werckmeister. She did this by formal instrument in
writing, atesed BY two witnesses, IN which, after re-
citing the deed from Mary Jumel B0wnes TO WerckmeiS-
ter. and the trusts therein she declares as follows;
Now the said Eliza Brown Jumel do hereby order direct limit
me,teT OF bis heirs convey all singular the said above described
premises such person persons and purposes the said
shall will and under hand
antreeu 10 the presence OF Two or more witnesses aeSaae anu P
point and tor T,5 m 5'2 10y s1soni H. SIPss Js sS % D M case be 5
@ BoTnes aud Ser tie death ny si husband Or in case he
survive me- then, mmedae aer death, TO her
we I % Inne died long before his wife The latter died
leaving last viand testament Therefore, II there
nothing else IN The chain Of paper title this prop
trust decd TO Werckmeister and the execution Of the
Once in the Children Of MARY ume Bownes the former
wife OF this defendant 70 w.t. Mrs Perry and her brother,
Jume BOwues (Irs. Clase and the latter died prior
to Mime Jume they would upon the death OF the latter
have taken the property to the exclusion OF all other
Ffi: on the 10th OF August, 1912, werckmeiser,
the trustee, and Mme. Jumel united IN an absolute deed
consideration stated In the deed 100000 On the
sOlute deed Mme. Jume aOue for the consideration
OF sl These deeds were dated the same day, and re-
must doubtless be regarded as one transaction. Now.
the question arises whether or not by virtue OF these
Phillipon this property stripped Of the trusts
which we're impressed upon II by Mary Jumel B0wnes in
her deed TO Werckmester aud Nine Jumel In her deed
OF appointment Ths question Is presented III the light
OF the fact that both Werckmeser and Nine. Jume had
Philpon had constructive II not actual notice. mas
much as both the trust deed to Werckmester and tue
deed OF appointment by Nine Jumel had been ON record
Beyond all question the object of Nme Jumel, by the
arrangement which we plainly see by the deeds exc
cuted August 20. ls2 by aud between herself werck-
melster and Phlhpon, Intended to break up tue trusts
upon which this property had been settled and secure 10
herself an absolute title In fee simple disncumDered OF
every trust and unfetterod by any Limitation Whatever
The plaintiff claims that the deed or trust TO Werck-
meIster conferred upon Mme Jumel an absolute power
OF sale at least the power TO direct sale at her
pleasure that this power was paramount to the power
appointment that the exercise Of tho latter did not
impair the former but left her authority 10 sell or direct
sale entire that whatever might have been the scope
OF her power OF appointment the exercise OF by her
the ls OF November 1925 was revokabe; that sue aid
eectuay revoke by causing the property to be
veyed PhlpOn IN 1872; ana consequently the convey
auce by PhlpOn her vested I'm her clear title fee
simple as absolute owner. lie also claims that inde
pendenty OF sthis, the revised statutes OF the state,
trODrtO rfOOre, executed this trust by ycsting In Nine.
Juel the legal titie she being tho sole donee bene
tclary OF the trust doeu.
On the contrary, tho defendant insists that Nine.