New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-05-31
FROM BENCH AND BAR.
GATHERED FROM LAWYERS AND AMONG
THE COURTS


Tho two most important court proceedings Of the
,s have concerned different branches Of the law,
,nsre might have been difficulty In securing the ser
noes of enough eminent counsel to carry them on at
IN. same time. The great Aqueduct trial begun be-
fare Judge Ingrahsm In the supreme Court viii oc-
muy several weeks. and the Judge. lawyers and
,rrs settled down to their tasks with the conscious
rss that some hard work would be necessary before
The n,rcsces of the case could be satisfactorily unrav
sned All the keenness Of James G. Carter, tho elo-
ouencs OF Joseph II. Choate and the analytical skin
and power Of clear presentation possessed by Elihu
Boot and Treadwen Cleveland viii scarcely make the
trial interesting from day to day, but the Issue is
important pecunary that the result Of the trial will
he eagerly awaited. The electric-nght case in which
Judge Wallace is hearing argument in the United states
Circuit Court also involves millions OF dollars, but in
the extreme technicaty Of the issues it renders even
the Aqueduct suit simple by comparison. Judge Wal
lace who usually selves at once upon the important
natures of patent case followed much Of the srgu-
uent OF the first few days with bewildered air. as
meant. The leading lawyers included several Of the
best known practitioners In patent law The patent
under which the Edison company seeks to maintain
fs exclusive rights is comprehensive document ana
defines with detail perplexing to persons not pos
sessed of mechanical skin the claim Of the Inventor;
other companies the damages to be recovered will be
greater probably than in any patent litigation Of re
cent years
The United States Supreme Court, among number
Of important decisions delivered last week, rendered
one in the Mormon Church case which is OF interest
because In which property is forfeited to the
state are comparatively The court decided
year ago that the law under which the Mormon Society
was dissolved and the property escheaed to the United
States constitutional. The only question unde-
cided the disposition Of the personal prop
erty of the corporation. The general rule is that
where q religious charitable corporation abandons
its operations or is dissolved by the State its property
is applied 10 nearly as possible like that
designed by those who subscribed to the original So
ciety. In case decided last month In Pennsylvania
the Pauline Temporary Home, charitable corpora
ton designed TO aid in caring for poor children. ceased
to exist and its property sold. The court ap-
pointed master TO report scheme for the expendi-
ture Of the funds received from the sale of the prop
ery. Many charitable Institutions sought to obtain
the money, but it awarded to the Childrens Aid
Society. The Germantown Dispensary and Hospital
objected TO this Of the funds but the Pennsyvana
supreme Court has decided that the object Of the
Home than that ef any of the other applicants and nd
rections the disposition of the Mormon fund the
United States Supreme Court has ordered the appoint
ment of master who shall report scheme for its
distribution. AS Of the distinctive features Of the
Mormon Church was the doctrine of poly gamy an in
terestng matter for the referee to decide will be to
worthy one which the church sought to advance
The learned justices Of the Queens Bench Division
OF England have recently given final decision in a
famous clothesline A Mrs Coles Of Creditor,
In Devonshire had clothesne which extended across
the property of Mr.. Heard, living next door. Mr..
Heard believed that some plants which he valued
highly injured by the soapy water dripping from
the clothes. He accordingly cut the line at a
place where it extended over his garden, and Mrs.
Coless clothing, which had been suspended from the
ne fell to the ground. In her indignation she caused
tho arrest of Mr.. Heard a charge Of committing
malicious mischief He convicted although
he said that he had warned Mrs. Coles previous
occasions, and had only cut the line on his own
property. Lord Chief Justice COleridge remarked
when the appeal argued before him al have al
ways understood the to be that II branch OF my
neighbors tree overhangs my ground / may cut it
down. and suppose the same rule holds if his shirt
overhangsn The judges thought that the magistrate
might have been led to convict because Mr.. Heard
did not ask Mrs Coles to remove the clothes before
he cut the line, but they set the conviction aside.
AS Lord Coleridge remarked Perhaps as Chris
tan he had better have waited and asked but am
not sure that in law he bound to do So"
The rule as to the fruit falling from the overhang
rg branch of a neighbours tree has been discussed