The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-04-30
MCPHERSON WILL
Judge Blair Seems to Favor
Leaving Baldwin in
Charge.
REPRESENTATIONS OF PARTNERS
Judge Smith Says They Will
Dissolve If Any One Else
Is Appointed.
REPRESENTATIONS OF PARTNERS

Without making any positive declara-
ton that might indicate what his decision
would be on the application for the ap-
pointment of an administrator pendente
lite for the estate of Mrs. Edla McPher-
son, Judge Blair clearly intimated at the
conclusion of yesterday afternoons pro-
ceedings in the Orphans Court that he
was averee to taking any action that
would remove Aaron S. Baldwin from
control of the interest in the firm of Nc
Pherson & Company. formerly owned by
the late ex-United States Senator John
r. Mcpherson This intimation was
made before Judge Abel l. Smith, who is
associated with Lawyer Henry M. Nutz-
horn as counsel for the proponents under
the WILL made the declaration that there
were two members of the firm of Me-
Pherson & Co. in court who stated that
they would force dissolution of the
partnership if anyone other than Mr..
Baldwin were named to look after the
Mcpherson interests.
The proceedings began promptly at three
o'clock. Counsel for all the interested
parties were present when Judge Smith
asked counsel for Mrs. Joseph Muir, who
IS contesting her mothers will by which
she was left only a life interest in the
vast estate of her father to cite case in
support of his contention that an appli-
cation for the appointment of an admins
traitor pendente lite nullified the prior ap-
pointment of an executor by the surro
gate
Lawyer Albert C. Wall, who is associ-
ated with ex-Assistant Prosecutor Mar
shall a Van Wrinkle, representing Mrs.
Muir, mentioned the case of Diety vs..
Diety, and Judge Smith then began ar
guInent to prove that the contention of
counsel for the appellant was incorrect.
He insistent that nothing but reversal
by the court could destroy the effect OF
the Surrogate's action in the appointment
OF an executor.
Judge Smith quoted a decision of the
Court of Errors and Appeals to the eff
feet that the act of the Surrogate was
conclusive until appealed and insisted
that the mere appeal from the action of
the Surrogate in appointing an executor
did not revoke the appointment He said
she court alone had power to do it, and
that lie Court must be sitished as to nec-
essity for the change.
5gidge Smith commended that the later
practice had been for the court to appoint
an administrator pendente lite, when the
Chancery Court would appoint a receiver.
lie quoted numerous authorities in sup
port of his contention.
Referring to the case of Brown vs..
Reilly, which was mentioned by Mr.. Van
Wfnkie when making his application,
Judge Smith said that it was the only
one in the statutes that appeared to sus-
tain the contention of the appellant. He
pointed out that in this case application
had been made to have the executor re-
strained and an administrator appointed
pendente lite and insisted that such ae-
tion would not have been necessary if
the mere application had the effect claim
ed by the appellant. One of the opinions
quoted was to the effect that in the
event of an appeal the Court may APP
point
Continuing, Judge Smith read from a
decision in third Vroom, page 40S, which
he considered explained all the uncertain-
ty caused by the many other opinions.
1t stated that the act of the Surrogate
could only be reviewed by appeal and
must stand until reversed.
Lawyer Wall, ia reply, quoted statute
relating to appeals which stated that the
application left the matter as if the will
had not been proved. He said that if an
administrators pendente lite was not APP
pointed the present executor would re-
main in control of the subject matter
In dispute. He was a party to the con-
TEST. and the question to be decided was
whether the Court would appoint some
disinterested administrator to take charge
of the subject matter of dispute pending
a settlement of the contest.
s.Will the Court appoint one of the liti-
gants to do this?" he asked.
Lawyer Wall argued that an appeal
taken from the action of probate court
had the effect of suspending such action.
He insisted that the argument of Judge
smith was to the effect that an appeal
from the action of the Orphans Court
would suspend such action but an appeal
from the action of the Surrogate did not.
In referring to the possibility of Mr..
Baldwin being appointed administrator
pendente lite, Mr.. Wall thought that 1t
would be giving an unfair advantage and
he did not believe the court could decide
IN favor of one Of the contestants be-
fore the other contestant was heard. He
concluded by insisting that the applica-
ton already made took the estate out OF
Mr.. Baldwin's control and asked that
the court appoint an impartial admins
traitor
Judge Blair referred briefly to Mr.
Baldwin's long connection with the busi-
ness of Mcpherson & Co., and spoke OF
the loss liable to occur 20 the estate If
he were removed from the control Of that
business
II am much impressed with the state
ment of the case made by Judge Smith.
the Court remarked, s1and therefore want
to look into the matter more thoroughly.
Counsel may, If the Court concludes to
grant the application for the appoint
ment of an administrator pendente lite,
make suggestions on Friday next as to
who such administrator shall be and also
as TO the amount of bonds he should
furnish,
Lawyer Van Win1xle thought as i
would be impossible for both sides to
agree on any one name, it would be bet
ter for the Court to use its own discre-
tion In making the appointment, In re-
pfv to the Courts suggestion that the
business of Mcpherson & Co might
suffer If any other person than Mr.. Bald
wiz, were named to look after it, Mr. an
Winlxle. said that the person 50 named
could act IN conjunction with Mr.. Bald
win.
= 49, y r., - IT, T7,fcr1