New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-03-30
A MUCH-LITIGATED ESTATE.
LAW SUITS FOR FIFTEEN YEARS, $4,000 SPENT,
AND THE End NOT YET.


Nathaniel Gilman died in Waterville, Me-,
in December, 1859, leaving about 100000. In bis
will he provided that the estate should be divided into
ten equal shares, among his children TO be paid at the
age % years To his widow Lie left FOR her use
third part OF a house IN CntOn-st., Brooklyn, with the
furniture and plate, q horse and chaise watch chains
portrait diamonds, and $4,000 in cash. Besides this
he left 500 900 TO be inyesed-four per cent OF the
interest to be given TO her for her use, and the
rest to be added to the principal The tesator bad
been married twice and had children by each wife Ho
also gave to the use OF his widow and her children the
rent and profits Of hotel and two stores Should his
wife contest the will he ordered that the cash amounts
set aside for her and her chdrens should be divided
among all OF his children. He named AS executors
George f. Charles e., and Anna X. Gilman, Isaac Red
ington Edward Mcclellan, and Summer Perelyal, the
three last named being sOns-in-aw.
The testator extensive leather merchant in this
city, but his residence the time Of his death, it is
claimed by the younger children, at Wateryle. The
first litigation in the estate grew out OF this ana the
question was raised to where the will should be pro-
bated. The body removed to New-York for burial
and the elder children obtained possession OF the viii
ami had it probaed here. Tue will was long contested
and during the contest Cyrus Curtis was appontedby
the Surrogate receiver Of the estate The will was finally
admitted to probate May o. 1861. but there has been
litigation ever since Shortly after the death of Mr. Gil
man his widow filed petition in the Probate Court OF
Kennebec County, Maine, for the setting apart OF
sum of money in lieu OF dover, aud was allowed
S75 900 George Gilman the senior executor Appealed
from this the Supreme Court which affirmed the order
OF the Court of Probate and increased the allowance TO
$4,000 The widow chen brought sur IN tHe sUPIemo
Court Of New-YoTk against the executors TO CDtln tAe
money She also began an action IN tle Ccut Court Vi
the United states against Georye f. Gilman 10 reeoxr
the amount prOmlss0ry note gwen by MN 10 Ma
thanie Gilman. soon after the beginning OF these ae'
lions w. w Gilman and George G.. Perciyal zone OF the
grandsons coiiineneen an dctGii dSihst nc NuoM ~
restrain the prosecutions OF the TWO actions DiOnsnt Oy
Ter. The Trials resulted IN decision iOr the Palhuus
After the trial negotiations were entered INTO Tor an
adjustment Of all matters in difference Inc result was
the execution OF cOnprOiblse d-Ie.heht petNgen az
the parties except Anna h. Gilman, the eXecurx ana
heir who was absent in Europe The agreement pro,
posed TO give the widow, III addition u about S-VVoo
already received by her, the sum OF $4,000 ana her
costs md counsel fees, in all about $4,000 IN l settle,
meut OF her claims 10 also proposed to annul the several
-its pendin and that all judgments ainst any OF the
parties should be canoe ed; that an account should 10
made an inventory rendered, and the estate ne us
trbutei The date Of this agreement was Now lstZ.
In suit brought in the United states Circuit court Dy
Anna h Gilman against George +. Gilman ana o1leis,
tho plang states In her complaint that u was tle uy
of te defendants hle an inventory Oh Tue d>sos Vi uo
estate which they failed TO do until Aug ~ l9oo ~Lea
tnvcntorv reDresented about 100000 IN easn ana
Appraised yalues these she claims proFeu 70 Do III law
worth 4 much larger sum- -, . -, ,s.,d,,.s ,vere
Tie complaint also asserts that the deI'hltEs sto
negligent and culpabe in the management OF hg tstI.e
aud wasted large amounts IN unnecessary ad h eats
litigation; that Mcclellan employed assets oI the ess
In sprcuale In stocks or the profit of the two Executors
through which they lost and became lndeDeu " '"e
0' 6n jan 26, $50 Anna X. Gilman brought suit
against exSurrogate Hutchings to recover mI ~
vbIr abe claims he paid March and Apfli, io.o'
and which were not proper charge against lh, ssSs,
Tie sums paid out were $1,000 10 fheIton ~.
Kudi ~ 500 10 Eldridge Johnson, ana S1OOO 70 is
Shaier rs counsel FOR tue eAecut0rs Inc sI va ~
cover 5000 with costs. The defendant admits tne p!
meufs but denies the plaintiff had suffered daua7ys
in any sum whatever and states that ne ae'eu VI LIS
judicial capacity as surrogate. -. ,,,.,,,,u and
There nas been about $4,000 spent III utsaon an
the estate remains lar from complete administrator"
it did fifteen years ago.