The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-01-09
THE GREAT JUMEL CASE.
The Present state Of the Coniesi in tho Ce
tury M,Il Sp.t.

The Present state Of the Confesi in tho Gems
tury M,Ii Su.t
six or seven prominent lawyers left this
city for WASHINGTON by lust nights train to
hrlue the famous BDwen-Jumrl cases, which
will come up To day IN tho Supreme Court
there. THE crowded condition Of the calendar
u that court has delayed the hearing Of these
so long that they nave asurably pissed
ont Of recollection IN this c,tv. The main
points are that Bowen, IN elderly citizen Of
Providence, Rhode Island brought suit IN eIect-
ment. on the common lag SIDE Of the United
States District Court OF Southern New York,
az Inst Chase, who was in possession Of, and
ciaiuIed title to an immense es,ate possessed by
Madame Eliza Jumel at her oe tn, and which
had been conveyed 10 her by her husband in his
lifetime.
Bowen claimed to DO Mad inc Jumeis son and
onib child, born iloeitmate, hut entitled to in-
herit under New York law, In tho absence Of
any legitimate issue. Tho property Ia worth
several million doll RS. The ejsctms nt was tried
and a verdict rendered for Chase. The paintlR
took error, claiming IS erroneous rulings Of the
Judge, that he had excluded hearsay proof OF
the declarations OF the dece lsed lady TO the
effect that Bowen was her and that "a ruled
that she had bad no Unbeatable interest in any
OF the lands IN contest; with other alleged er-
rcrs.
In the meanwhile Chose had commenced a
sutt on the equity 81 20 Of the same Court pray
lug for nm injunction to prnvent Bowen from
prosecuting his aci bns, cxcep; tae writ OF error,
ana asking 20 have certain dceds which uurport
to convey TILE from Mrs. Case u Nine. JumeI
declared void; ana seeking farther to declare
III the Jumel estate Ii .bie Tor AMI swallo we'd up
In &c tain marriage agreement made between
Nine. Jumel and ~. Psrs NJ lrlellx, France,
whose son married Chascs daughter
Chase was NJ In successful. obtained IN In,
Junction from the District Ju ige set a lido Mrs,
Chase's deeds, ana swept aw, tho entire state
from Bowen, under tho marriage contract.
Bowen =. pealsd NJ 10, Alleging mat the deeds
were valid. that tao msiliage con TACT VA. no;
proven nor, n proven, hindiug on him as heir
and, hnally, thar he could not be enioiaed from
another trial IN eject nent since the New York
atGtes expressly permit two tri.ls IN such
actions, ia all cases.
the two appeals WIN come on together for
argument. 1t T. underwood that Msssrs. Jerry
Back. Charles O'Conor. William ". EyArts, and
j mes {. Garter, together ,yitl Mr.. Chase him
self. who Is mepber Of tho legal profession,
VIII apooar for the respo lGent aud appellee;
and Lew :. ca tgel1 MorTt, Il. sawyer. Claun-
cey Shafrer aud Gideon j. rdcfer, together with
T.. 5. rprntor Of Wisconsin, foe the appellant
and plaintiff IN error.
Bat the htlsa ion concerning this murh-con.
tested property isnot hkrly - end with the
rresen, suits. Franc,s Jumc ana others,
claiming to be- coli ternl heirs ~ Stephen Jl-
mel. former husband ~ Eliz D. nave now brought
their suit IN cqlity, claimin that the decs con-
v'ylng III this prOprrN from Ssepnen il mel 10
T. ia, were ir ,uduient az against them: and
that ~ phen died intostale, ana the ltnd da-
secluded " ihem. Whoever DO the victor IN Tue
present liueati1n wilt therel re ve 20 CON
tend vii me new Cpmers. Mossrs. nHlalslf
S nith aud j. u. stewart tepresJnt tho French
heirs.