The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-12-30
TRINITY CHURCH PROPERTY.
The Work of Mrs. L. II, Wallace in Pushing
the Claims Against the Corporation.

The Work of Mrs. e. II. wallace in Pushing
the Claims Against the Corporation.
New York Special.
Mrs. E. H. Wallace, of Cincinnati, the leading
contestant in the claims against the valuable
property of Trinity Church, has filed bill
in equity in the United States Circuit Court for
this jurisdiction.
Mrs. Wallace is now living at IA Clinton Place,
where, with Mr. Thorpe, her counsel, and Il pri-
waite secretary, she works night and day, tracing
up genealogies, comparing vast amount OF pr.
vate papers obtained from the descendants OF
old Dutch settlers, collecting proof, transat-
ing ancient Dutch records into modern English
and answering correspondence from all parts OF
the country. She seldom comes for meals.
The Trinity Church people have ninety days
in which to file an answer to the bill. new
and most important discovery has been made by
Mrs Wallace, which will have Il strong bearing
and influence on the case, and it also brings up
very prominent historical parsonage of the
early days of the Republic, no less a parsonage
than the notorious Aaron Burr.
In the days when Burr was a leading lawyer
Of New York, he was employed by some of the
heirs of Aneke JAMS to prosecute their claims
against the corporation of Trinity. He drew up
and filed bills in chancery, and then sold out to
Trinity, so that the suit went by default
Burrs bill in the John Bogardus suit is most
interesting document. 1t is in Burr's own
handwriting, carefully written, and plain as
copper plate, addressed to the Chancellor of
the State of New York, in confrma-
ton of the title of Aneke Jams, and
against the claims of Trinity. This would seem
to totally dispose of Trinity's pretensions to
hold ownership under a grant of Queen Anne
Burr then goes on to recite the will of Aneke
and give list of the devises under it, and shows
that parts of the land mentioned in the will are
the same as those given in the deed
of 1911 He tells how Trinity first came to
make claim to these lands. and goes on to show
the crookedness of the Trinity committee by
reciting that while they claimed to hold the six
ty acres now in the most valuable part of the
city, under the alleged transfer to Governor
Lovelace, they also claimed it under the grant of
Queen Anne. If one title was good and proper,
why bolster up the claim with another2 A
treaty of capituation was an international treaty
and stood above any act or deed which party to
it could perform. Hence the Queen Anne
grant Burr next shows that while by law
Trinity was confined to the possession of prop
erty valued at f5, 900 yearly income it in 1875
had claimed property valued at ESQ, 000 Of
course, this property has since grown to he
worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and the
actual income yearly, from rents ETC., is really
about S., 900, 600, but the Trinity vestrymen do
not admit any such revenue, Burr shows the
scheme of Trinity leasing the property thus:
''The said corporation tTrinity) had not posses
made for the purpose of acquiring possession
thereof, and so to establish q right and title to
their said corporation"
This he declares to be utterly void and of no
effect, unless and until confirmed by the person
or persons, or some of them, who are sliced in
fee, or have freehold to such lands.
The bill covers forty-eight closel y-written
foolscap pages, and is in possession of the heirs
now for the first time.