The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-12-25


ties holding adversely the alleged win surrender such
possession In substance and fact then, this action is
ono for the recovery of tbo possession of real estate
adversely held, and all ntents and purposes is ono
identical with that which formerly known by the name
of An Action of Eecmcntp although the ultimate relief
soughtAs partition among owners which, however can
oniybe accomplished after their right and
enjoyment. shall have been established BY trial There is
nothing then the character action which
prevents the full application of the statute
quoted only declares the character OF the
h % s BE 4 S rf q an e %
that previous sections az 49, ~ prescribe the in
for The plaintiff 70 show his authority 70 bring action
Ss as q . q & 18Th sisS % ,%s
ssn and q sls ss n as
sss b .sss.
T.. 81 tie Il . sss the s
mspea .uss scsion. writ,sn rocssnitIon q tSs
s... les tia. 1 and
the language tho section itself covers case like the
pre,ent and it Is founded the rule that all
writing Is held that Knoeaad unless this section
OF the statute is abrogaed must bring himself within its
Tns, R p.tAns short written evidence u: e
;Hn .. well settled (TeSsrmott psysoS.I
1s n 'S sss X As as ssas.sa.
q sss s & .s j sssrn. s the ss
msSss a. action :1ss,meas ;sis;
IN that ss0s sa.us rsaues wsn
request to commence the sut either by the plaintiff his
# #. the e
ss's "
5eo' and It now regarded as settled law
b s
this ground only It Is due however to tho rights Of the
The grounds Especially presented and urged upon
a%"r
nn or to use his name or has the said Stewart IN
. IN TIE discussion and examnation OF this question o.
on hs moSn
great difficulty Of and ascertsning the truth
eod Of so he sssas specifies the
X II
has been herein attempted has been most foreiby i'm.
spirit the soson which ia. been enc
'sS L
% s % ns u
jet Of the evidence Of retainer Of attorney by
rsas Ike M mott. so to
vincing q such need But leaving this dTres
Mon d IT. Of r. ii. s" 5. of % s" Of
i mot By !, Kpssnsa that there was any my
s1ossh sssat fsssss
Ms line {.
be n he sam * 7 "a ss
ing i he would permit him Kneclan his in
ss 'ess Ssrsi h
81 IT. NH
TINT between the 1873 and that
9Th
Il rS.r thu. Jas sS
1879, Knoelana wrote 70 Mr. Chapman informing
s'sR again
MI mr. i s So saS
a and the s. S sd to Mr.
Directed line Of proof is
before suit brought those occurring after i
Sd been commenced tho order Will be observed
Did Knssand write the 9th day of June 1876, tho
plaintiff Alexander Stewart for authority to his name
5 e be S hs = sosa e h y
M By Mr. h. who e claims ;s the
Robert cbspn.s skassasS ne
Jnly g. 1875 IN which the former says Mr. Alexander
letter uisimo BY the aidsvt Henry
Kneeand stewart shown to him IN August 1876 il
Ss s sC s he OBJ
ported ~ be II reply to one q that had been written
which dispute soan,ess letter from knsssnd
from the latter % Judge Hilton which appeared in the NEw
his wife and the members Of his family deny the
Of any letter whatever from Kneeand II such letter had
eeve that i would not have been the subject Of
ms anu II thht letter resulted
in the formal authority to Chapman and Kneeand
the % H. ssssn s mis- by 10
and the extract thcrefom stating the
August the
mons and complaint !. T. impossible TO conceive tina, M
Ing The The s.s, and the copy
ali npon Tie suSss Ait this ns
did do i seundsny proved BY the oatns q parties o
b. to II the q Question
and adopted We dealing with
the problem Of original empoym in 1876 axd IN solv
iand 3 ls7s ssss.rs fer authority 70
ss sa gave 70 y The 70 o
r.nng for the sake o. argument that Kneoand wrote
important fact .iiIi remain. anirnatvey Shown
,ns 70 i 81 81:
formal power TO enforce them by suit In determining
s% q to
Il
empower Kneel.nd e prosecute an acton wcnid not
|! contain III. relationship to the laio Alexander
s. asS Nc i a"a Il. NOR
any action can be found therein The expression Our
mined upon aud tho Whole matter was under Amusement
II turn from the letter n, Ch.pm.ss version n.
Of September ~ 1878. the absence Of any direct
sss Stating es hun
sna h 9n @ aS hG n, eInsSS q
They both wished me 70 answer kneeiaed's letter
lips in tho letter Kneeand which Is attached his
position hcrcin dated July D. 1875, and marked Exhibit T.
lie said be wanted should help him get his rights
in what he called a large property, and that would
should be we'll paid. After writing the letter made
following charge on my book: July O, 1875. Robert g.
Stewart and his father debtor - time aud aton
and kneeland s0o From that time forward said
ander has often talked with about his claims
heir the large estate and always inquirng how the
matter going did make any further charges
against him. The In order tho letter OF
July H. ls7s II will be rcerbers that the cttcr Of
July q, 1876 is from lawyer to lawyer, and claimed
TO written In response 10 asking for power
specific and the adavit Is made by the writer OF
letter. who knows that ths point in tho d.
authority action II sach authority
given u should have been given IN plain words and
ended be expressed by the phrase Our CLIENT the
counsel failed in the letter which no though
therein he he states he old mans story
fell his lips aud IN the affidavit which no has made
s possible Mr. Chapman tho interview
July o. 1876 confer authority to bring action
he In affidavit OF September ~, 1875 that
he often requested by Stewart ito direct X Knee
land attorney of said CITY, to take such steps rs he
should 1T to his of the property but Is
manifest, when we have letter written July u 1875 which
purpors give all that Mr.. Stewart said, and detailed
version OF that interview In subsequent AFFIDAVIT
that authority TO action conferred
There was II Chapmnns statement II true general
upon the enough said TO enable Chapman
70 speak OF him Our client but no OF tho
Of plaintiff In any suit proceeding to