, 1897-11-20
COULD SUIT.
JUDGE NJ. G. BROWN OF THIS CITY
HAS BEEN ADVISED OF
IT'S COLLAPSE.

A Motion to Dismiss by Mrs. Angels
Attorney Was O%verruled and the
Case Will Be Tried December /
Comments of the New York Tri-
bune Upon the Outcome OF the Case
Judge NJ. c. Brown Of this city has
received word that Ward & Cameron,
attorneys for Mrs. Angel, have gone
into court and moved to dismiss the
action against the Goulds. and have
supported their action by afldavits
that they have been deceived by false
representations and that the whole ac-
ton has no foundation whatever in
fact. The attorneys for the Goulds re-
sisted the motion to dismiss the case
and insisted upon a trial. The court
has placed the case upon the preferred
calendar for trial and 1t will take place
the first Monday in December. The
court has required that a copy Of the
order be served personally upon Mrs.
Angel.
The New York Tribune of the 10th
inst, being advised of the collapse Of
the Angel suit, makes the following
comment:
at is to be hoped that neither good
nature nor pity. nor n inclination to
save themselves trouble and annoyance
will prevail upon the heirs OF Jay Gould
to neglect prosecuting every person
who had a share In the conspiracy to
swindle the Gould estate in the name
Of an alleged widow, whose claims, II
established. would have stamped with
illegitimacy the children Of Mr.. Gould.
But whatever they do 1t is the manifest
duty Of our public prosecutors to fol-
low up and punish these swindlers to
the full extent OF the law. Altogether
too much leniency has been shown to
false claimants and blackmailers in this
country. The temptation to victimizc
a great estate is always strong-even
If a scheme fails, the chances OF punish
ishment are remote at best-and it is
time that some severe lessons were
taught this class of ~scOundrels if any
property or any family is to be protect
ed from blackmail.
"Mr. Ward. the lawyer who brought
the suit in the name of Mrs. Angel. de-
clares that he was deceived, and has
done all in his power to set the matter
right. Opinions may differ as to wheth.
er or not he took proper precautions to
insure himself against imposition be-
fore taking up n case of a character
peculiarly open to suspicion, but there
is no ground upon which to question
his good faith or professional honor.
The persons, however. who made him
the instrument Of their attack. wheth-
err or not they were the original con-
spirators. were certainly in position to
know the truth. and they should be
held accountable for the swindle. The
claim was not due to a misunderstand-
ing or mistake. 1t was a deliberate fab.
ricatiOn Of false testimony to support
a mythical claim. and the persons who
invented the scheme knew that they
were engaging in a crime. II those who
appear as hackers Of the claim and who
interested the lawyer in 1t are not the
real offenders, it rests with them to
show who deceived them and how they
became so wonderfully subject to de-
ception. The simple failure of the
conspiracy must not be the end Of the
case.
There have been &C many similar
attempts on, estates in the last few
years that vigorous action Is imperative
where SO plain an instance Of fraud
and perjury as this can be shown. The
attempt not long ago Of some rascals
to victimize the estate Of L. A. Robert.
son Of this city by means of a woman,
picked up in a liquor shop. who had
never heard Of Mr.. Robertson until she
was instructed to pose as his widow,
cannot have been forgotten. The laws
Of this state have been SO literally con-
structed that the adventures often
reaps undue advantage. Some hold
that 1t is best 80. but however that may
be. certainly the state owes 1t to the
man Of spotless family life to protect
him from evil imputation after HE
death and to guard his wife and chill