New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-11-01
THE GREELEY STATUE.
DISPOSITION OF FUNDS APPROVED.
TAKEN BY THE EDITOR OF THE TRIBUNE
HIS TRUST PROPERLY FULFILLED.


TAKEN BY THE EDITOR OF THE TRIBUNE
his TRUST PROPERLY FULFILLED.
The Court of Appeals Tuesday handed
sovn & decision affirming the judgments Of the
courts below in favor OF the defendant, in the
cotton OF Alexander Doyle. a sculptor. against
Tz-hiteIaw Reid. The action tried in the
Supreme Court before Justice Cohen, and he
directed the jury, at the conclusion Of plaintiffs
csse 10 find a verdict for Mr.. Reid. The Appel
late Division unanimously affirmed the judgment
entered upon that verdict, and the Court Of APP
meals has now in turn affirmed the decisions be-
80 unon the opinion Of the Appellate Division
written by Justice O'Brieu
The action was Of a somewhat extraordinary
character II arose cut Of the erection in the
CITY OF New-York of two memorial statues to
he memory Of Horace Greeley-one designed by
the DISTINGUISHED sculptor John Q. A Ward, and
standing in Printing House Square in front of
The Tribune Building. and the other made by
the plaintiff several years later and erected at
broadway and Thirty-third-st. In 1872, almost
,.7-ne6fateiy after the death of Mr.. Greeley. Mr..
Reid who then succeeded him as Editor Of The
rr-f',-,ne took active steps TO have proper me-
,--o-fai erected in Nj Greeley's honor. He took
counsel with other friends Of the dead editor.
among them William ". Niles. who died in this
CITY On Tuesday last, and together they organ
lied 2 committee Of siXty-fve distinguished edi-
,o-s and public men 70 solicit and receive sub
scriptions for such q memorial MI Niles was
,,osen as the chairman. and Andrew H. Green,
then Controller Of the city Of New-4ork, was
made treasurer few months after the move
-. ,rss started the panic Of 1873 broke upon
The business community and the work Of the
committee was. by common consent. abandoned
as irnpracticabIe at that time
The treasurer then had on hand sum quite
inadequate for the erection OF an appropriate
statue. In the mean time. Mr.. Reid had been
tntrusted with two separate gifts Of $1,000 each
which were 10 be used as, in his discretion
seemed best 70 honor Mr.. Greeley's memory. IN
addition, small sums amounting 10 about Sl'ooo
had been sent 70 The Tribune for the same
purpose When ne panic broke up the commit
tees plans, Mr.. Reid was the only one who did
rot abandon the project. He turned the matter
over 10 Mr.. Ward the sculptor. and in 1851
made q contract with him TO make for $4,000
the statue which several years later was erected
st the threshold Of the door through which Nj
Greeley went TO and from his journalistic labors
for many years. With the approval OF Mr.. Niles
and ell the other members Of the committee Of
1879 and with the personal consent or acquies-
cence Of the donors, Mr.. Reid devoted 10 this
purpose the IS 600 that came into his hands as
above stated and he personally provided the
rest Of the necessary funds.
In 1887 Mr.. Niles made unsuccessful effort
to get together the survivors Of the Committee
of 1873. TO dispose Of the fund still IN Mr..
Green's hands, but only the late General John
Cochrane and ]. Q. Howard responded 10 the
notice the latter not being a member OF the
original committee. The result, however, was
the making by them in 1889, as a so-calIed
Executive Committee Of the agreement with
the sculptor Doyle. upon which he sued Mr..
-
had both approved the action previously taken
by 3Ir. Reid in devottng the funds in his hands
10 the Ward statue. the plaintiff in the suit
claimed that he had the right TO recover over
aGain the amount so paid
Henry u. Sackett. as counsel for Mr. Reid
c0ntended In the Court Of Appeals and in the
courts below that the only purpose Of Messrs
Niles, Cochrane and Howard was TO make some
proper disposition Of the fund in Mr.. Green's
hands; that the Doyle contract contained no as
slgnmeut Of the funds received by Mr.. Reid and
10 reference was made TO them for the reason
that the majority of those executing II had
already approved Mr.. Reds action in devot
ing these funds TO the Ward statue; that IN
reality this Executive Committee had
trol over the funds received by Mr.. Reid. The
committee Of 1873 had dissolved in that year be-
cause OF the panic. the majority Of them had
died. and # had 10 valid existence after 1873
Therefore Mr. Reid held the funds in his hands
as trustee 20 carry out the wishes Of the donors
his Obligations as trustee Le had executed faith
fully, conscientious1y and generously. The
plaintiff was an entire stranger TO the Greeley
statue matter with which Mr.. Reid was con-
nected The donors were the only ones who
could call him to account Instead Of doing so
they had sanctioned and approved what he had
done. The action taken by Mr.. Niles in 1887
and by the Executive Committee in 1889 gave
the rla!rtif no standing il court
The Appellate Division and the Court OF Ap-
peaIs have sustained these contentious The
opinion which was adopted by both Of those
courts says:
The original committee had practically dis
bs-EeE in 1873 with the project unfinished, ana
leaving but one person the defendant, who, on
his own responsi bility. undertook 10 success
fully carry il out, making himself name LOT
many thousands Of dollars in excess OF any
sums that he had received as SUBSCRIPTIONS
The defendant therefore, having entered INTO
Obligations looking toward the CARVING 80 oL1
OF he intention OF the subscribers TO the fund
We Dc aot think II com petent for TWO nleHl-
bers q the original committee, fourteen year
aft-rward 70 errogate TO themselves the right
am authority t undo all that the defenoaflt
had done a great personal expense we fah
10 fnd any principle upon when the comm zee
q 1857 OF the plaintiff obtained any title 10 the
moneys in the hands OF the defendant The only
ones seemingly having the right 10 question me
disposition thereof would be the persons VINO
originally made the subscriptions. TWO thou-
SAND collars q the money received by the de-
ferdar1 and The Tribune consist Of two SUD
scrir-tors. The evidence shows that the mooe IN
which such Subscriptions were TO be appled was
LEFT = The direction Of the defendant: and there
no proof that any OF the subscribers 10 inc
$500 objected 70 the disposition made; that falr
inference from the testimony being that, before
such added 70 the defendants own