The Newtown bee., 1889-08-09

toilAFy pFutailIy, whipped his father un- E tii hesrelented and gave into his possess sionlabont ss220O. .sJusison had received about $2 200 from the sale of his proper ty. On his hehalf, Irenchard, with his wife, who was sister of Andrew, brought suit against Andrew. As Il result, an agreement was made May I5, 1858. be- tween M. H. Trenehard, Judson Peck and Andrew Peck. Andrew was. to re- tain Sl500. Thirty-fiye dollars. a year was o.be paid for the support of Judson, which Was i'll the hands of Trenchard, who was to4keep, until tshis death, ls700l in bonds. Trenchard's wife also had t8100. After Andrew left, Judson made his home with Trenchard.. At that time, Judson Peck had these living children AGel, Andrew. Mrs TIenehard, Mrs Wheeler, Mrs Polly Ackerson, Mira Han nah Howell, Asher, Lucinda Curtis. Eli U, father of Dr E. J., was dead; also Russell, Laura Ann, Melissa, [Mr3 Trenchard produced d letter from Abel Peck, dated May 20, 1875. Itrelated to Andrews property and said, si.When An drew came here he had several hundred dollars in, gold, besides bills and other property" The letter was ill answer to an inquiry as to Andrews financial cir cumstances. In 1858, Trenchard brought suit against Andrew.sto recover cash and notes belonging to Trenchard under the agreement, but which Peck retained. Judson Peck died in '59 or..'6O. He had never given away property, save II strip of land to his son Asher. Trenchard
 has never presented claim against An dreW's estate.
 Mary E. A. Peck. widow of Andrew,
 who is now living with Mrs Jonathan Whitehead in Bedding, was familiar with
 her husbands business. She did not ac-
 company Andrew and his father to Con-
 necticut. When they left Poultney, N.
 Y, Andrew had about $170O, which he
 carried in q belt. She did not see Dr E. l !. Peck until after the death of Andrew
 and saw Henry F. Morgan but once at
 the house. She was living with Andrew l In 1885 and was positive that he did not visit New York in December, as Dr E.. l J. Peck had stated. Had never heard
 Abel say that Andrew owed him. though
 they were we'll acquainted. Mrs Peck
 had three children, of whom one is liv-
 ing, a daughter, at Rochester, N. |. At
 the time of marriage, Andrew had a
 house, barn and 60 acres of land, for
 which he held a warrantee deed from his I father. When the property was sold,
 however, yudson took the proceeds. An
 drew could not have gone to New York
 without her knowledge, because there
 was not time for him to do his business
 in Bridgeport and visit the city on the
 same day. She never saw Andrew give
 Abel money.
 I Dr l.. !. Peck said that he did not tell
 W. H. Glover soon after the death of An I drew, that he had not seen Andrew i'll a
 dozen years.
 l The hearing on this claim was suspend
 ed until the testimony of W. H. Glover I could be obtained and, in the meantime. 1 the claim of Dr Eli J. Peck. for whom Mr Northrop was also counsel, was talk
 en up.
 Dr Peck is son of Eli J. Peck, who was
 half brother of Andrew and son of Jud son Peck. He said that Andrew came t This office in New York, December Is
 1885 and was anxious to settle ssthis
 claim business As he was about t
 settle Abel Peck's claim, he wished alst
 to arrive It an understanding with Dr E II ', r,4s.., ,, 2 sa-na x.,ac ooao,,taj Ny n Peck, who received $50 on account q
 that time, for which he receipted and ; ], promise to settle the rest soon. Hae ]. heard nothing from Andrew until he wa ]. shot, Andrew said that this money wa ,, , given him for E. J., which should hay
 been received at the age of 2l. Som time ill the COS, Andrew told him tha ! he had S7O0 for him. He had alWay ,, known that Andrew had property be < longing to him and had been told so b :. }, his mother and Abel. It was late in tn ! afternoon when Andrew visited him ] \ his office in New York. When Andre, ' offered Dr +. J. $500 to settle, the clain ' with interest, would have amounted :, 5000, but Andrew would never acknow F edge interest. Dr E. J. had neve | brought suit against the estate, beeans r he did not have the money to pay cost T He had seen Andrew but once from ls1 2. to the present time, with one exception K Here the case closed until Tuesday morl u ing.
 T Wednesday, Selectman ". H. Glow kfx, r5 J. Peckss effects, Dr E. J. told him. i'll u E Epresence of Detective Estey, that he ha II, not seen nor heard from Andrew in ,i- or l5 years, thus contradicting the do oG tors evidence that he had seen Andre 2. December IS, 1885. Judge Beecher al en introduced as evidence letter from l
 E. J. Peck to Administrator W. ' 10 Glover, asking $20, ,0O0, principal and at terest, for money stolen by Andrew fro 'e his father, Jndson. This was afterWa i'd withdrawn. The testimony of ". P French and others showed that this W
 an impossibility, for every dollar own ne by Judson was fully accounted for. or ldisallowing these claims, the estate " saved nearly $3000. Thirty days are on lowed in which to file an appeal, but eu is doubtful if this is done. Thomas D an ton of New ' ork, who had q claim 'of R45O for the use of the Tine proper Y which Andrew occupied for seve sbo years, did not appear and the claim \ he disalloWed.
 Claims against the estate, amount NJ IAa1ss -wrxs p. ad- Mary F Peck, 8s' snrx .&-s.4