The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1895-11-15

GRAVEYARD SUIT
Fight Over the Greenvi1le
Cemetery Before Vice
Chancellor Pitney.
EXCEPTIONS TO MASTERS REPORT
~
Buckmasters Say the Trustees Dis
criminate Against Them in
Selling Graves.
EXCEPTIONS TO MASTERS REPORT

I'll
The famous graveyard suit of the
New York Bay Cemetery Company
against John W. Buckmaster and others,
was argued this morning before Vice
Chancellor PitEey in Chancery Cham
bers.
Counsellors Everett p. Wheeler and
Charles Meyer. Jr., presented the de-
PENDANTS exceptions 10 the masters re-
pert.
The master. Mr.. Charles D. Thompson,
found that there were S,519 lots in the
cemetery at Greenville of which 1880
now belong to the defendants. OF the lat
ter 35lk lots were sold by the trustees
between 1878 and 1891. None of them
have been sold since. For the proceeds
tof 1S9 of these lots the complainant
settled with the defendants in 1887. From
1878 to 1891 the sale of single graves be-
longing to the defendants nave amounted
to l 4.4SO.
THE cost of maintenance of the ceme-
terry after deducting part of the receipts
was $95, 061. 81. OF this sum ne charged
one-fifth to the defendants and that there
is a balance due to The Buckmasters OF
81, 532. 3d."
EXCEPTIONS OF DEFENDANTS.
The -Buekmasters take exception to
these amounts and of course claim a big
ger balance. Counsel set up nat the
efendantS are not entitled to have cred
tied as against the amounts paid by the
trustees for the wages of men in its en-
ploy, the earnings of those men in the
work of the cemetery. The master, they
said, allowed wha he found to be the
actual cost of the work done, for which
various amounts were paid to the COM
p~lainants. For example, a fee of five dol
lars was charged by the compliments
for opening a grave. In the work of
opening men were employed whose sala-
ries were charged against the Buck
masters. This, the defendants think, is
unfair.
In the next place the Buckmasters
complain that when a single grave be-
longing to them had been sold the
charge made was SIS. OF this ten dollars
privilege, and five dollars for interment
fee. The master in his report credited
the Buckmasters with only ten dollars
THE DETERMINATION.
These are the general points of objec-
ton, but there are theirs to which
counsel referred at length. Mr.. Wheeler
said that the proper way to deal with
that branch of the case pertaining to the
sale of lots was to decree that the trus-
selling the lots of the Buckmasters. and
that they, the trustees, shall not, in
making such sales, discriminate to the
Buckmasters' disadvantage.
w have shown" he said, that the
complainant trustees occupy a fduciary
relation to the defendants. 1t has a power
of sale over their lots. On any theory
of the duty of a trustee to sell, he is
bound to use diligence to SELL"
Counsel charged the trustees with hav-
ing totally failed in their duty since the
commencement of the SHIT
RIGHT TO VOTE.
Concluding, counsel asked the Vice
Chancellor in. framing his final decree
that the New York Bay Cemetery trus-
tees shall be compelled to recognize the
right of the Buckmasters and their
grantees to vote at annual elections upon
the lots owned by them.
The right has been denied the Buck
master heirs in violation, it is claimed,
of the original charter which gave
to each lot owner the right to
vote on each lot owned by him.
The trustees, it is further claim
ed, procured legislative powers linn
iting the right of any Individual to
rs votes, but say counsel for the Buck
masters the act was clearly unconstitu-
tional SO far as the are con-
cerned, because it Invested of a right
of property without making any COM
pensation.
'vice-Chancellor Pitney took counsels'
brief as well as that of Mr.. Lawrence,
of the firm of Babbitt & Lawrence, coun-
ion in this famous suit is expected with
in afhn month