New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-02-22
FROM BENCH AND BAR.
GATHERED FROM LAWYERS AND AMONG
THE COURTS.

honor the memory Of General sherman, ie" Vi ''o'
who made the motions for adjournment BEFORE '"e
Judges alluded to remembered the fact that nc i"'
been lawyer HIS active service In the proiesSion
was short and not particularly glorious. lie was d
ready talker, but his mind was too full OF orhih"S
IN be content with the study Of precedents anu INC was
too restless under constraint TO hear with paue"o ~
defeats which every lawyer must expect in MS picoo
The tributes to his memory were hearty ana VIII" "'
entire absence Of parisanship, which showed now UNI
versal n favorite the distinguished General nan De
como in the city Of his recent residence iIe "ios'
cloquent words spoken in his memory III u'e '
were those Of Colonel Fellows, VINO sef'cu III '"0 ~
fedcrate Army opposing General Sherman ine o''
smoke with the utmost fervor. dwelling on '"c "ooe
Qualities OF the commander. He even ACKNOWLEDGED
that the destruction of Atlanta was military "o'eN
sitv His words Of euosy of both Grant ana SHERMAN
were eloquent beyond the powers of most ORATORS
Tho tor,,id eloouence of the former DistnctAt
,or,ev failed Of IFS expeced result in case winch ne
tried last week before Judge MARITIME. III was 'no
first criminal case in which he mad appe'fcu en''o
his long service prosecutor lie ueioluo" wv.
Young men accused Of robbery. ana as inc vase ,'
once been tried and the jury had disagieeu "e ii'
some reason to hope for acquittal Inc sun"'s
an ., ,be nrevous trial had been committed To an
inexperlenced young attorney while Colohei Fellows
made a long and eloquent address. TIC ""oi' "','
u nj, energy ON the weak points of the Prosecutors
cose and the good character OF the deiehua".s i''
ornament was one of DistrictAtt0rney Moon new
olli.tonts who though able and painstaRihe' hao
scarcely conducted dozen criminal tHais Ill MS
hor, form of office Colonel Fellows received INC
CONGRATULATIONS of friends at the close of his address
and awaited with impotence the Verolct o l'c J"'N'
Tho ;nrors returned after short absence VIII" WI
dict of guilty Of robbery IN the hrst degree tc
.ord,ct possibe though a recommendation OF inc ue
,ordants to the mercy of the court was added. NO
avn d,ubted the skill or ability of the Defendants
eo, b,t the facts developed the trial bore
,rcv AGAINST the defendants. and the jurors. whIe
listening with pleasure TO his Speech were hoV 'oli
WINGED by his arguments.
csooro reoI estate brokers appear to be unreaSon-
oh,v excited over recent decision Of Judge Anthony
in suit brought by firm Of brokers 10 recover com
missions on the sale Of piece OF real c>'dvc' NV
,ro,ers seymour & Co.. through clerk sought 20 III"
a niece of property for w. H. warren an nl'c"une
,rcbaser and learned that James A. Blood had certain
o,o,+v which might suit Mr.. Warren. The pr1ce
e,cd nv Mr. Blood was S11 800. but when ne learhe"
that the clerk appeared for broker MI fl"'" Hau
- want Won distinctly to understand ula' VIC pay ~,
commissions; we handle and sell our own properly
and nav no commissions TO any one IhcSe prices ,io
mat 70 MS The brokers aftcrward cndeavOred 10 IN
apce Mr. Warren TO purchase the property ior f"V
more than the fixed price so as 10 OMAN 'u
,aeior h,,, Mr. Warren having received information
ahout the property from other sources aI'er"'i" pun
chased II for 10000. judge Anthony held uld' NV
trolors could not recover commissions. because 'c'
could only sell at a price high enough 10 alIo" u'
owner to receive 81 500 and because letter. III W'
+be brokers said that they would send purchaser
ond wanted Mr. Blood to protect them in their com
missions did not bind the receiver OF the letter ne
held that there must he employment by the owner
before the brokers could recover. me b:"AeTN "cic
angry at the decision and OF them Is reported az
making fierce attack on the judge al mceuhS VI
the Real Estate Board. The decision appears t. nave
and M
brokers who appcar to have forgotten the words spoken
many wears ago in decision by Judge Lewis -
Woodruff " An owner cannot be entlced INTO naph'N
for commissions against his Will mere VoiuhVe'
without authority not entitled 70 commissions me'eN
because he inquired the price which an owner a'FN
for his property and has sent person TO MN WHO
consents to take IT, 1t is not true that an o"he'
nav not declare price to whom he viii WITHOUT c
hazard OF paying commissions to those VINO 'oiu"r"
unasked, to send him purchaser on his own terms
peculiar case in which woman "NrI
thirty years old sought TO establish her claim 10 '"'
estate Of a man whom she declared 10 be her l'''e'
is reported among the Pennsylvania decisions Thomas
sheehan about whose estate the dispute arose" was a
laborer In 1855 in Hampton County fehhe' INii'"
He became intimate with a widow by whom P' had
a child who placed with the Widows sister, u'c
wife Of Garrett Gibbons. Shechan afterward marred
the widow and became prosperous. Tie soaght u
recovcr his child but the Gibbons family had dis
appeared He traced them 10 Pttsbure, thence 10
birmingham and then 10 KeosuR, Iowa. where the|
had lived in 1859 He made several Western trips but
could not obtain turtle trace Of them. lie sim man
tanned that his daughter might be alive and on his
deathed made his wife promise continue the search
He died in september 1857. and his widow soon after
| ward related the story which published In the
Pttsburg newspapers 4 few weeks later Julia Mar,
| Mitchell presented herself the heir she
| told a remarkable story Of her life and as
| she had a birthmark such the mother had
previously said that her child had borne, she Was
| received by Mrs. shechan her daughter aud they
have since lived together The claimant said that she
could remember living in family where the children
bore the Of the Gibbons children she alluded
| especially to an old who had no nose and there
was such man in the Gibbons family She said
that she recollected going with OF whom
she subsequently identified as Garrett Gibbons. and
| the other Of whom known Andrew Harrison.
| She was left with Harrison and his WIFE who
strolling players. year later they left her in charge
| Of a Mrs McCreary or McCleary, who afterward took
| her to an orphan asylum in st. Louis and left her
| there. she must have been six years old at
| that time. She taken from the asylum in 1868
| by Mrs. Mitchell and took her She lived in
| Newcastle until she the story published in the
Pittsburg papers in 1897. Many persons swOre that
the claimant bore close resemblance TO Thomas shechan
IN features, figure and disposition. The existence OF
| the blrthmark was also proved
| The claimant might have succeeded IN her attempt
TO obtain possession Of the estate If Just at that time
Garrett Gibbons, whose family the infant had been
placed after it, birth, had not appeared, after
having been vanly sought for thirty years. lie gave
| an account of his wanderngS and declared that the
| child entrusted his wfe's care had died In l75S
HL wife died about the same time. some witnesses
| appeared to corrObOrate him, though not 10 great
extent Two witnesses declared that the child had no
brthmark The Judge decided that the claimant had
not sufficiently proved her case, and the Appellate
Court in opinion just reported, has refused to dis
turb that judgment. 4 peculiar feature Of the case
was the attempt to show how Thomas shcehan had
| looked by producing a Photograph Tor comparison
! with the features Of the young woman who declared
that she was bis daughter. Unfortunately. thc photo
graph was so far faded that the features could not be
dstingu Photographers employ ed al their skill.
but unable 10 develop the picture satisfactorily
proof Of the exact appearance OF Thomas shee
han conld not be produced IN court In spite Of the
decision OF the courts many persons reading the testl
| mil ln 10 The