New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-12-08
BENCH AND BAR.
GATHERED AMONG LAWYERS AND IN
THF COURTS

THF COURTS.
Tho table, In memory of Judge Hamilton w.
Robinson formerly OF the Court of Common Pleas.
was presented to the Court last Monday at meet
ing OF the Bar such as was frequently held many
year ago. but which has become rdrer In recent
wears When the membership OF the Bar was smaller
and every lawyer of distinction met frequently all
the other eminent members Of the Bar the death Of
onv eminent Judge the death retirement from
active service OF leading lawyer or some other
similar occasion would lead to the calling OF a
general meeting of the Bar In large court
ROOM where addresses would be made recalling the
main Incidents In the life OF the lawyer who was
honored relating incidents of practice Drought TO
mind by the occurrences which led TO the gathering
Tho proceedings at many OF these meetings
corded in pamphlets which lie half-forgotten on the
shelves of old lawyers in the law Libraries OF the
city The careful ndexng OF public Libraries IN recent
years enables bs nrofess az to obtain access to
Of these pamphlets bo ang tne but
keen and witty give graphic pictures Of life at the
New-York Bar twenty five or fifty years ago The
presentation of the Robinson tablet afforded occa-
Zion for some addresses of this kind. but the num-
Der of LAWYERS of large practice T. low 50 great
eral meetings Of the Bar have lost something OF
their popularity and the eloquent members OF the
dresses az those which in former years delighted
and Informed the younger memDeers OF me ne b. b.
The failure TO hold frequent meetings or me BAR
tends 70 perpetuate the lack Of unity which has
heen noticeable in recent years.
The new rules adopted by the Appellate Division
o, the Supreme Court contain a number Of inno-
ro,,ons and some improvements on the practice
under the old rules The great gain Is IN uniformity
of proceedings The practice OF calling the calehdar
weekly and setting cases for trial which cannot ne
adjourned except for extraordinary reasons mas
worked well in the courts when adopted IL anu
has been retained and extended In the new rules
in assignments
minute snd the regulations OF other branches of
court business are carefully drawn. The trial OF
az Tho Judges having special acquant ance
with that branch OF the law to dispose rap,aiy OF
WacI"an viii have before them this year more OF
the elevated railroad for trial than the other
ndicae T that places viii be found for many OF the
old officials connected with the court ana i ,n Is 70
he boned that few OF those who have served falth-
fully in the Superior and Common Pleas courts
will be compelled to retire.
Wills are. under the present practice OF the Sur
rogates Courts usually sustained unless the evil
dence OF undue influence or unsolndness OF nina ~
overwhelming Surrogate Fitzgerald Few days
ago denied probate OF will in which the evidence
OF undue influence was so strong that the 'uuse
had little difficulty in reaching conclusion sur
rogate FITZGERALD in the careful and clear opinion
which he wrote. says that Jennie Garland VINO
sened the paper offered for probate, had barely
reached the age when minor can make legal
beouest OF personal property. She had long Deeh an
invalid and according to the testimony OF some OF
the Witnesses she looked like a girl OF fourteen
or fifteen years OF age. and was thin, wasted pale
and languid The paper signed by the young woman
gave her whole estate to her aunt, VINO nau peeii
npred her brother her nearest relative. with whom
she had always been on friendly terms iIosa, ,
Fitzgerald quotes several decisions OF the courts
showing that undue influence Is frequently pre-
sumed when guardian is nstrnmenta IN proch hi
aS the 9dee Fzgerad was sascd from ali the
proofs that the Will was the result OF ui i NM
ence exerted by strong VIII over SICK you"s
girl
The peculiar Langerman case. tried in the Court
Of General Sessions involved many Interesting
legal points aside from the sensational develop
ments at and subsequent to the trial The conduct
Of one Of the jurors who had some knowledge as
TO the facts and did not disclose 1t to the Judge
brt communicated II to his fellow-turors would
under most of the decisions Of the courts, be Vo-
lation of his duty. In the early days OF the jury
system when those who mdged as to the facts
,yore chosen from among the persons familiar with
the acts charged. the jurors were themselves VII
nesses and their individual knowledge was inc
ground for decision. Since the system has changed
the general rule IS that jurors must be governed
only by evidence received In court: Ihey are arc,
however allowed to use thir own knoWledse OF hu-
man nature and of matters Of general notorlcty 70
govern them in their dement OF me d IN D or
ness OF the witnesses. 1t has Deen heIu III one 81
TWO cases that juror may use facts Wltmn ms
nv deciding
a witness but in general the duty or a Juror VITO
has knowledge Of some fact likely 10 erect ,l9
verdict is to communicate with the Judge ana
have the evidence taken in open court 50 mar me
counsel may examine and croSs-eXainHc the va
Iangerman case was so important that his failure
10 inform the Judge and lawyers concern ng II az, IN.
doubtedly had an effect in determining the 'e'u'0'
A United States grand juror who was guilty OF
a violation of duty of different kind from that OF
the Langerman juror was recently sent TO the
County Jail for six months by Judge Morrow, OF
the United States District Court In California The
Juror accosted the complanng witness in con-
spracv case who had testified before the Grand
Jury a few hours before. and he and the witness
sat together for four hours In the bHiaId-room o.
the Palace Hotel. converting principally about
Grand Jury matters. and the particular case then
before the Grand Jury. According to the AFFIDAVIT
afterward made by the complaining witness me
grand Juror H. J. Summernayes. told many OF his
experiences as a petit juror and as a grand juror
He told of conversations am ng grand jurors ana
made remarks upon the hard.hp OF investigati ting
Jurors received only u week for their services
The grand juror denied some Of the charges made
against him, but he acknowledged mat ne Iai
talked with the witness about the matter then De-
fore the Grand Jury. He was accused OF contempt
Of court in disclosing the secrets OF the Grand
Jury room His counsel argued that The grand
Juror had been guilty only OF indiscretion but Judge
and M%i' senencef Mr. summcrhayes to mprisonmen,
for six months in the County Jan or san Francisco
4 monthly magazine will be- issued regularly
the official paper Of the Kansas City Ear Asso-
citation, and It's first number has just been pub
Mshed. II contains a fun report OF the papers
read before the Bar Association. and other matters
OF interest to Kansas city lawyers. The papers
published show that the Bar Association discusses
matters of great interest TO the legal profession
ana some Of the addresses are Of nigh order.
Judge John W. Henry. OF Kansas City read at
a recent meeting an entertaining paper OF "The
Bench and Bar of Missouri Some Of his auec-
dotes were new ami humorous The Missouri Bar
has had some lawyers Of National distinction. bu;