St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-04-06
A GREAT LEGAA STRUGGL LIE
TO Place Mrs. Barteau in Posses.
sion of Her Rights.

1t seems that tho cause celebre, the
case of Barteau VS.. Barteau, which
quenc he'd the morbidity Of domestic
mongers for protracted season last
winter, is about to develop more con-
tentiOn between the principals, nOtwith-
standing he decision of Judge Kelly in
favor of Mrs. Annice G. Barteau No. 1.
Since the case has been decided AttOr-
ney Charles n. Bell, who successfully
fought Mrs. Barteau'S claim to the es-
tate which her husband had shared with
Barteau No. 2. has been making earnest
endeavors to force an issue of
settlement between his client and
those against whom he secured
Judgment for the whole of the estate
which is valued at over 100000. The
courts final decree ordered that Mr..
Barteau and his second wife, Mary A.
Bailey. deliver up to Annie G. Barteau
No. an accounting in full of the values
of the estate; that they pay to her all
moneys, ETC., which the court then set
forth in regard to specific properties.
Since then, however, Mrs. Barteau No.
9 has languiShed elsewhere than in this
state, and her opposing counsel asserted
in court yesterday she has migrated at
the suggestion of her husband and her
attorneys, so as to avoid the service
upon her Of certain notices which are
pertinent to an adjustment of her in
debtedness to Mrs. Barteau No. l.
Anent this caper of Mary A. Bailey,
the wiley Mr.. Barteau keeps up pro-
fessional wrestling match between
the lawyers Oh his side, who
number half dozen Or so. and
Mr.. Bell, whose fear less charge of his
clients interests has made Of him
much opposed man. bravo" says his
feminine admirers, who have watched
the triumph of his noble cause in behalf
of one of their sex. Yet for all that Mr..
Bell has done for Mrs. Barteau No. 1,
who is most estimable lady. it seems
utterly impossible to reach determina
ton of the strife. Mrs. Barteau No. 1
is virtually the proprietor of the estate
she has recovered, which is estimated
at over 100000. and yet she is compelled
to suffer the defendants to draw the
rents, benefits and profits from her
rlghtful possessions, until her attorney
can force an accounting and a settle
ment This, the defendants resist, and
empIoy--it is said-every means of de-
laying the matter. Thisls evident from
the many crosS-questionS which come
before the court at every special term.
Yesterday again an effort was made to
do something definite and the appoint
ment Of a receiver was petltioned by
Mr.. Bell. But. as usual, the matter
was forced into continuance by the
powers that are ''begirSt'' the patient
Mrs Barteau No. l.
In Mrs. Barteau's petition for the ap-
pointment of q receiver, she states that
the defendants are eXtravagantly en-
Toying the property which the court has
declared tc be her own. She cites
much in detail about defendants action
in delay of the final proceedings for her
recovery, and states that Mary Bailey
has and is now satisfying and collecting
mortgages which belong to the estate.
In answer to this deposition the de-
PENDANTS yesterday filed in court a gen.
erai denial, qualified, however, as to
certain mortgages which Mary Bailey
has il fact collected and satisfied.
affidavit and statement OF the rents col
lected since the commencement of Mrs.
Barteau's action, which statement eX-
hibits very small sum as having been
collected from the rental Of estate tene-
ments. Defendants further state that
the building known as ''Barteau Flats"
which was recently constructed, was
actually built for and by contractor by
the name of Barber, who now has pos
session of the building and who is draw
ing the rental therefrom according to
an agreement between him and defend
ants. Further depOsing, defendants
state that Mary Barry Barteau and Mr..
Barteau had mortgaged the estate to Sc
! cure a loan of 100000, which money
was in part applied to the erection Of
the Barteau fats, which they claim cost
| 100000 in its construction. Therefore,