The New York herald., 1875-09-26

approved everything that was doing in the manage
OF the affairs OF said further say that every
occasion when have been called upon TO receive these
communications from the medium one has purported
TO emanate from the said James b. Taylor,
the husband OF the said Laura s. Taylor, and
he also has signi1ed his approval Of my
That all these bequosts the part OF
the said Laura s. Taylor and this disposition her
part 10 be governed by spiritual communications as 10
the management Of her affairs executrix led me TO
believe, as did believe that, while II my duty to
treat her with great kindness and Affection the same
time not TO accept her judgment the conduct OF
business affairs, and have therefore, mainly relied
upon the executor and my associate counsel for judg
ment and advice"
In this connection Mr.. Andrews inserts letter re-
ceived by himself from Mrs Taylor bearing date the
10th OF May last and directed to him "Dear Rufus"
which letter closes follows :-''Now, dear Rufus
Kate Fox is coming to this afternoon. l wish
that you would come, so that you can have talk
with Jun. We Will see what he has TO say. Do
not fail TO unless something urgent prevents" l."
He states in explanation that the Kate Fox referred
TO is the celebrated Kate Fox tho spiritual medium,
and that the "Jim referred TO is the late James b.
Taylor the deceased husband Of Mrs Taylor. Owing
TO another engagement II was impossible for him to
comply with the requests OF Mrs. Taylor; but the
letter of substitution was written on the day following
he ''presumes that II must have been suggested by
some spirit that Wingae and Cullen be Substituted in
his place"
ADVANCES TO MRS TAYLOR.
Mr. Andrews proceeds to give quite an account or dis
DursemenIs ana advances alleged 10 nave been maze
by him TO Mrs. Taylor. He brings her in debt 10 him
in the sum OF $s S63 90 for money thus advanced, and
says that Mrs. Taylor has frequently told him 'that
except for the money advanced she would have
been turned into the streets and become a beggar"
He adds that he has notes for the money
DESIGNING TRICKsTERs.
Mr.. Andrews says that during the past spring he has
discovered the fact that Mrs Taylor has been receiving
visits from persons not OF any professional standing,
some Of whom he knows to be designing tricksters
without moral character. brief quotation from this
portion of the affidavit has in It an interesting sugges
tiveness. "Ono Of these individuals" says the ani-
davit who still frequents her house she informed
had advised her that If certain firm Of lawyers could
be retained as her attorneys and counsel political in
nuence could be brought to bear and which WOud
assure her success in the courts.
EXECUTOR SAYS.
The remainder of the affidavit is taken up with var-
Gus matters the principal point of interest being let
ter from Edward H. Tracy, executor, deceased,
directing him Andrews) not TO turn to Mrs. Tay
or the papers his hands relating the estate he
desired TO continue his services in the management Of
the property and suits.
oTHRR AFFIDAvIrs
Three other afldavts made in opposition to the
motion made respectively by George H. Duryea Will
lam T. Monteverde aud Henry G. Mattson. Mr.. Dur
yea who confidential clerk of Mr. Taylor and has
since resided with Mrs Taylor states that the latter
has been kept fully apprised by Mr. Andrews of all the
steps taken her suits and has always expressed un-
bounded confidence In him. Mr.. Monteverde is the
managing clerk of Mr.. Andrews, and no confirms tho
statement OF the advances by Mr. Andrews 10 Mrs Ty
lor Mr. Matlson had general supervision of the Utica
claims against the Taylor estate He says Mrs Taylor
always expressed to him her implicit confidence in the
professional skill and integrity Of Mr. Andrews sup
Elemental affidavit of Mr.. Andrews explains that he
would not have loaned Mrs Taylor money had it not
been for their relations client and counsel and his
assurance that 1t would be repaid to him from the
tate
ARGUMENT OF COUNSEL
The papers both sides having all been read the
opposing counsel proceeded To argue the law points in
volved in the case. Colonel Wingate, who opened the
forensic fire, said that he willing that Mr. Andrews
should bring action to recover whatever might be
due him for his professional services He insisted that
Mr.. Andrews could lose nothing through the substtu-
ton. He did not why Mr. Andrews should not
take the position OF any other creditor. He insisted
that the whole thing was in a nut SHE'LL that Mrs.
Taylor had become disgusted with Andrews; that she
wished to emplOV other counsel his hat
she had perfect right to do So
Mr.. Courtney made elaborate response He said
that this motion of great importance affecting
counsel There was time when, at the whm and ca
price OF client, an attorney could be removed That
day was passed. The courts had inerfered to
protect the rights of counsel. He relied upon
rule 1 adopted by the Convention of Judges last year.
directing that ian attorney may be changed by consent
upon application of the client upon shown
and upon such terms shall be just by the order of
the Court or judge thereof and not otherwise" He
elaborated the points OF this rule at great length.
Mr. Busteed contended, in further opposition TO the
motion, that the right of ltigant TO change attor-
ney not an unqualified or absolute one that the
exercise of this right had always been under the
srictve powers of the courts of which attorneys
officers This restraining power Of the Court would be
exercised of its own motion it appeared that the best
interests of all the persons concerned in the
estate Of the deceased would be conserved
by denying the motion to substitute He argued
that Mrs Taylor's present unhness to select
torney apparent the opposing papers and that
at all events 1t would be premature to anticipate what
action the Surrogates Court woud take in respect of
actual management of the estate had been con6ded and
who shortly before his death, had given Mr. Andrews
written notice that he must remain the attorney for
the estate.
Crticsng the fifteenth rule upon the subject Of the
substitution of attorneys Judge Busteed argued that
the philosophy Of the rule is that attorneys need and
should receive protection against the dishonesty
gratitude or cupidity of clients The Of the
rule he said found in the experience Of and
lawyers and the extent Of the rule be determined
by the rule 1t exists at the time its applica-
ton is invoked; and that the practice Of the
courts under rule differing from the existing
rule is valuable only recognition Of the principle
philosophy upon which the rule is founded Rule
l5 said Mr. Busteed, is unambiguous wholly free from
doubt and plainly read and easily understood. The
rule is TO receive liberal construction from the
courts because it remedial in its character and pur
pose The removal Of the attorney be only upon
cause shown, and then only upon such terms may
be just. II the convention which framed the rule
and which, it must be remembered, has the force of
statutentended TO restrict the 'terms" to the pay
of counsel fees it would have made the
rule say But the convention knew that what is
'just' cannoto always be enforced by ordinary law
process and n was mindful of the maxim, "Ezpressio
unius est eEciusio alterialS"
At the close of the argument Judge Donohue took
the papers, reserving his decision