The Newtown bee., 1895-08-09
Affairs About Town.
THE MITCHELL-HAZARD CASE

THE TCHELL-HAZARD CASE HEARING ON MONDAY AT THE BRIC1
 BUILDING BEFORE JUDGE OF PRoBATl
 BRADLEY.-LAwYER BEECHER URGE
 THAT THE COURT SHOULD CALL IN
 JUDGE FROM A NEIGHBORING DISTRIC
 TO SIT ON THE CASE.-LAwYERN NORTH
 ROP OPPOSES THE sUGGESTIoN.-JUDG
 BRADLEY wITHHOLDS HIS DECISIol
 AND ADJoURNs THE CASE TILL MON
 DAY.
 About dozen spectators were presen at the Probate office in the Brick build ing on Monday, when the case of Law renee Mitchell versus Mrs Ida M. Hazard of Monroe was up for hearing. As il perhaps generally known, Mrs Hazard formerly Mrs Ida Hubbell, has been sueC for $2500 for goods alleged to have beer furnished by Lawrence Mitchell to Mrs Hazard previous to her marriage, an6 this case is now pending in the Superior court. Ex-Senator Houlihan, who by the way is the trustee on the insolvent es tate of Lawrence Mitchell, in a petition to the Court of Probate, stated that he believed it to be necessary to the inter. ests of the creditors of the estate of said Mitchell, that Mrs Hazard should be re- Iquired to attend said court as 8 witness, l q md hpnit tn n i'm q a witness upon all matters relating to the disposal or condition of the property of said Mitchell, to his trade and dealings with her and others, etc. Judge Bradley granted the petition and issued the order citing her to appear on Monday.
 Lawyer Beecher, of the firm of Beech CT & Garfield, counsel for Mrs Hazard, set the ball a rolling on Monday. He grst quoted from Section 435 of the Gen. eral Statutes of Connecticut, which says
 When there shall be so near relation ship between any deceased person and a Judge of probate, as between father and I son or brother, by nature or marriage, or when any such judge is interested in any matter brought to or pending in his court, or shall have been retained or consulted as attorney or counsel in any matter, he l shall be disqualified to act as judge in re- 1 lation to the estate of such deceased per l son or in hearing such matter, if anyone l interested shall object thereto. And he l may decline to act as such judge, in any matter, if in his opinion it would be im- proper for him so to act."
 Lawyer Beecher emphasized the fact that this was peculiar and unparalleled case. That there was often a relation I ship which existed much stronger than I ties of kindred. That he believed the court should avail himself of the privi- | lege granted in the last clause of the | statute quoted, and call in some other judge to sit on the case. He stated that he believed there existed between the pe- titioner and the court relationship which was stronger than ties of blood, and firm as the flag pole in the Street. He then referred to the high standing of the judges in the neighboring districts and urged the court, owing to the deli cate conditions which surrounded the case, to call in a neighboring judge to l act. Lawyer Beecher then paid his con- l pliments to the question in hand He believed the case was simply high handed attempt to cite poor, defence less woman before the Court of Probate, and then to submit her to 8 corkscrew course of questioning, in order that they might obtain facts with which to go on with their case in the Superior court I This case has other disagreeabIe fea- lures, continued MT Beeeher, and reeks with acrimony, spleen and bad blood. Lawyer Charles H. Northrop, who is associated with Lawyer Williams of Bir- mingham in the prosecution, then took the floor. He stated that the case was a peculiar one, and could see that the re- marks of Mir Beecher might cause his tinued MT Northrop, "Your honor is the sole judge of your qualifications to act.'' It seemed to him that unless the counsel l was prepared to prove that the court was disqualified, that he should proceed with the case. Mir Northrop explained that the proceeding was simply citation for examination under oath, to find out whether the said Mrs Hazard had order. ed any goods of Mitchell, whether she had received money from him and whether she had paid him. Mir Northrop empha- sized to the court that this case was not a trial, but was simply citation for a witness to attend and testify under oath. In closing he stated that he believed it was subterfuge for the counsel to come in and claim that the court was disquali. fed. He believed the court was quail. fled.
 Lawyer Beecher spoke briefly in reply He enquired if they were to be criticised for coming before the court and doing what the statute allowed them to do. He believed that whatever facts they mighI obtain from the testimony of Mrs Hazart was the body, bones and brooches of ths case, that it was an unfair and unmerci less proceeding, and that the counsel fol the plaintiff were asking the court to b a party to it.
 Judge Bradley announced he would re serve his decision in the matter till Mon day next at II a., m.
 Following is copy of the complain and of the orders of the court
 To the Honorable Court of Probate
 within and for the District of Newtown Il The application of Michael J. Houliha