New-York tribune., 1890-07-15
PRICE THREE CENTS.
MR.. WRIGHT EXONERATED.
REPORT OF F. r. COUDERT, REFEREE.
THE ATTORNEY OF RECORD IN THE FLACE
DIVORCE CASE NOT GUILTY-A GOOD
WORD FOR MEFKS.

WORD FOR MEEKS.
Immediately after the conviction Of eX-sherif James
A. Flack and his son William l.. Flack and Joseph
Mechs the Obligng attorney, for conspiracy in pro-
curing fraudulent divorce for Flack from his wifo
without her knowledge, proceedings were begun in tho
General Term Of the supreme Court 10 dsbar both
benjamin Wright the wellknown real estate lawyer,
who allowed his name TO be used as the attorney Of
"rcor in the original divorce proceedings and Mecks
Mccls saved the county the expense Of trial and him.
>elf that of employing lawyer to defend him by re.
signing from the bar Of this state. This was after
he had served his in the city prison AID paid
he fine Of $500 which Judge Barrctts
sentence. Mr. Wright, however. feeling tha,
he had been imposed upon by his lifelong
friend, Mecks, decided 10 stand trial, and
he General Term judges on June l3 appointed Fred
eric r. Coudert the referee 10 take testimony and
report on the case. Albert stckney and John A.
1ayor appeared for Mr.. Wright and Assistant District
Attorney CON represented the District Attorneys
Office. During the last twenty days Mr.. C0udert has
held many sessions and heard large amount OF fes-
tm0ny, and Yesterday he completed his report, which
will be fled with Judge Van brunt to-day, when Mr..
>tickncy, Mr.. Wrghrs behalf, will probably mako
a motion 10 have the referees report confirmed. Tho
report entirely exoncracs Mr. Wright, and makes The
further assertion that in far the testimony pre-
cnted TO Mr. Coudcrt goes there is nothing In 1t which
convict, Mcehs OF anything more than an undue haste
in cxpedting the divorce proceedings 10 protect the
Flacks from exposure.
lie deals extensively with what he calls the in
hcrcnt mprobablity Of a man like Mr.. Wright en-
gagng in case Of this kind with the intention Of
dong an Illegal act. He had the evidence of the
Flacl trial before him. to all Of which referring 70
Mr. Wright Judge Barrett had certified and from
MecIs's own story he does EOt lni that the lawyer
va, guilty 0f an intentional act defrlud any ono.
AIl the evidence presented tended to show that Mr.
Wright was acting in wha7 he thought good faith,
and uiIcr authority from Mrs. Flack. lie was an
extremely busy man. and did not have time 70 follow
he detail, OF the note the tine which elapsed
letwccn tic signing If the summons and the affidavit
of regularity. When Mecls assured him that twenty
days had elapsed he believed him implicitly. As 70
the cr;,urcs Oh the I'LL of complaint, where his namo
was substituted for that of Ambrose Mcneil, Wright
testified that he nothing Of it, and testified that
ic did not keep eraser o. HI, desk. In the man
Judge BooAstaVcr, Who ,.gned the decree Of divorce,
ana FRANK " Nchcuor, Mr Nilghta clerk, corrooo-
rated hi, testimony. . ,,-.-,,-
Mncu Judge 30Jhstaver told Meeks that MonelPs
name uil,i come OH from the summons and complilno
a, the attorney Of record .Or Mrs. Fack, MI toudeFu
IS charitable enough % Mccks to say that he must
have iaheu udg. BoOk-ttNcr to mean that IL must %
done al once and the case hurried through a. ex'
p,Gto.>y possible, and IN 80 far As the te,tlm0hy
i,,,.ortoi llm t1"rr j. nothing 10 SHOW tUau
uy either Hr Wright or Mcehs there was any h'ehuoh
40 rlure Nr,. tlacn.
he evidence pr-entcd with great func>s and clear
ness. During the taking OF Tie testimony largo
number OF Witnesses were produced WHO tcsuned 10
.lr Wu-It- h gl Character standing and integrity a.
business man and lawyer.