New-York tribune., 1879-12-18

" Such case never before heard OF IN any
court of Justice" was the comment OF one OF the
counsel before Judge Van Hoesen yesterday In the
divorce suit of PhGbs Robertson against w. H.
Robertson. The motion which was made IN the
Court of Common Pleas, Chambers. was nomnai'y
for the substitution of William w. Badger for W.
H. Van Wyck as attorney for the defendant. Inc
,tory told by the aidavtS presen cd by Mr. Badger
extraordinary one. According to these
papers the plaintiff obtained absolute divorce
from the defendant ON March !. 1873. ON the
ground Of infdolity. The husband has been absent
from her more than wears without her hearing
anything from him. The law in such cases pre-
sumcs the death of tho husband aud permits
The wife to marry again. Mrs. Robertson, eight
days before the decree of divorce granted, did
marry Richard c. Fellows lawyer of tins city.
and they lived together as husband aud wife until
last Spring He then. he claims. for the First tlmc
learned of her prevons marriage aud divorces there
was domestic trouble and a separation Mr.. Eel
lows then, IL is avcrrcd. employed Pinkeitons de-
teciyes 10 hunt np Mr.. Robertson and TO get facts
that would enable him To break the decree of dl-
yorce He spent several thousand dollars in bring
ing Mr. Robertson from Nevada where he was en-
gagged in mining speculatOns, to New-York TO act
~ the nominal party 10 the proceeding. ". II. Van
Nyck was employed by Mr. Fellows as Mr.. Robert
sons attorney. and he made motion last Summer
before judge J. I. Daly to have the divorce jndg-
ment opened and to allow Mr. RoDertson TO come IN
and defend on the ground that he had never been
served with the papers IN the original suit.
Mr. Robertson was 20 deny tho charge oi
adultery against himself and also To pnt
m an answer charging adultery upon the pi@lH'lu
Lccause of her marriage with Mr.. Follows before
the divorce was granted. Judge DAILY allowed me
judgment 10 he opened and the defendant 10 oner
proofs but decided that the judgment OF u!IoIce
should stand valid in the meantime. Mr. kohert,
son found that he could not sustain his case and
f.N
more willing 90 dO this a. he dishked hl' ioThei |
wife. and his rcsiGcuce was now IN Nevada pS .hc |
laws of which he is allowed to marx again.: MI |
Van Wvck however. in the interest a. Nh Fellows |
continued o. proceedings Mr. Robertson om-
oloyed Mr. Badger Ia rcpudiato them, ana sought 10
9ov.. his attorneys changed. Nh. Robertson when |
n. first came East had gone TO the plantation Oi MS
father near Richmond. Va He was induced 10 come |
to New York by Il letter WHICH he received rom |
Ircnor ". Park. written Tor his friend, MIR. rel |
lows. In this Nh. Park writes that when Mr.. rel |
lows married Mr.. Robertson before the divorce, lie
supposed that She was a widow. she telling him that |
her husband dead, and she being put down IN |
the directory ~ q widow. Mr. Fellows Was man |
nf good family and good reputation, Mr.. Park |
wrote and would bear all The expense OF the II. ga
non If MIR Robertson would permit the proceedings |
10 he carried on. No answer 10 tins letter appeared
among tue papers. but The following letter written
by MIR Robertson to Mr Van WNck last month ex-
pains his present feelings and hs view OF Tire case;
RICHMOND, Va. Nov 20, 1879.
W. II. VAN WYCK eQ.
DEAR SIR : directed YOU in July last TO dscon-
tnuc and abandon all proceedings IN the action OF
divorce brought against me by Phpbe Robertson,
particularly the appeal taken by you from the final
Judgment. | am surprised TO learn that yOu have
disIegarded my orders and insist upOn prosecuting
the said appeals upon the pretcnce that am III
debcd TO yon for legal services IN the maIter ihs
v0u know to be false AS you have sent judgment,
and know that have paid YOU all You ever claimed
Tor your previous services. You induced me to make
after from Nevada to New-YoTk for some purpose of
your own which old not iully understand. When
I rni the letter fIom lTFor W. Park in June. 1873,
came 10 New-YoTk with means furnished by You
through Robert A. iinkertOn only 10 learn ON ar
rival that yon were being well paid by Rich
ard c. Fallows 10 try 10 use me for
some dishonest purpose in his intercs, and that you
desired To prove that the divorce had been obtained
against me unfairly and by some connlvanee or
consent Of mine. when yon we'll knew that dId
not oven know of ITS existence until IN
jf The Court thinks now that ought to pay YOU for
such rascahty that, trust al least they Will al
low jnry trial 10 fix the value OF such precious
services. In Nevada, "A lawyer would he hung for
Such practices. Int know moi what the custom IS IN
New-lofk. lonr suggestion that owe you any
sum whatever under the circumstances Is infamous,
YOU well know YOU often assured me That was
10 be- at further expense IN the matter, ana you
have only asserted this claim since yon learned thai
was not villain enough to try to prove what we
both knew tn be false. send this 10 you through
my friend. Colonel Badger, who's authorized To APP
ply fOr a substitution oi himself as my attorney IN
Vour place, and 10 settle with you' as he way think
best. | trust your client, Mr. Richard {. Eel
lows, may find joy in the plaintiffs society, which Is
more than ever found there Doubtless he can
still employ YOU and smith for that purpose but
yet left Tor honesty and mailhor Yours uniy.
". Il. ROBERTSON.
Frederick W. smythe, who appeared for Mr.. Van
Wvck TO oppose Mr.. Badger on tue motion yester-
day claimed that the plaintin aud defendant III the
divorce sut acting IN collusnn. rs were also
Amos Hull, her lawyer, and Mr.. Badger. Ii was
urged that Mr.. Robertson II he chose coald sustain
his defence. and that II would be unjust 10 allow
decree of diyoTce 10 stand under such circuin-
stances. Mr.. Badger. while he denied the coliusIon,
said that the clam was without point IN any case.
~ there could lie no such rhing rs colluson alter
Judgment Mr. Hull. who was IN the COURTROOM,
adj ssahi itr erl = AS
concerned he was not ashamed of any part nc haO
played ~ the case and iie rfpudiaed the lnSinua-
iions of unfair conduct. Judge Van Hoesen
served ms decision.
DIREC ING TIE CREMATION OF HIS BODY.
INSTRUCTION OF CHRISTIAN r. PUNCH TO HIS En-
TCUIORS.
Inclosed in the will of Christian T. Funch. which
was offered for probate in the >urrogates Office yes
terday the following letter:
NTw-YOEK. Sunday April. 1877
TO ma dear friends oRd ,cecWtors Ncysrs. Ge0lge M0c
H,Rry IOickmdR and ~. J.. FaHch.
A. seen in my last Will of March 10 desiIe when
dead to be cTematcd. If thls performance cannot
be done wi hout paradng in the papers-lIke Baron
Palm last year-then | request You to have my
body embamed put in an IRON coffin and send In
Europc 90 a place of cremation. Milan, i believe,
Is the only place where not much talk is made oi
cremation. Out Of my estate. OF course, the eX-
Icuscs are 10 bo paid; and | request you 10 hnd
Trustworthy man to 20 along aud see the perform
ance done regularly. The ashes are 10 be put ia
urn OF bronze 70 be buried at Copenhagen. Yours
unto deatn, faithful friends, Chr RED. FCNCH.
Mr. Fnmch who the senior member of the
wcl-kuown firm OF Funch, Edyre & Co., ship
brokers III this clty, made Will on March 10 1877
ana a codicil on April 20 1879 The will contains
the following directions concerning the cremation
Ii my wish and desire. and therefore request
my executors hereinafter named. after my decease
20 my body to he cremate ed in the most ap
proved scientific manner and strictly in accordance