The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-06-14
NO TRIAL BY JURY.
Judge Blair VIII Himself
Hear the Mcpherson
Will Contest.
HEARING WILL BE JUNE 28
Lawyers for Mrs. Muir Ac-
cused of Insulting the
Court.

the Circuit Court for trial by jury the
| contest of the will of the late Mrs. Edla
| Mcpherson, widow of former United
States Senator John r. Mcpherson, was
/ heard before Judge Blair in the Orphans
Court this morning
/ The many counsel representing the
various interests under the will and those
opposed to it were present and during
the somewhat spirited discussion counsel
for the proponents under the will de-
clared that the local legal representatives
| of Mrs. Eda Mcpherson Muir, who is
contesting her mothers will, had insulted
the Court by the intimatfon that by rea-
son of the confidence in Mr.. Aaron S.
Baldwin expressed by the Court in its
recent decision on the motion for the ap-
pointment of an administrator pending
litigation, it would place them in dis
advantageous position in the coming con-
test If the case was not referred to the
Circuit Court for decision by a jury
Counsel for the contestant disclaimed any
| intention of insulting the Court by Civ
ing this suggestion as reason for certi-
flying the case to the Circuit Court and
| Judge Blair said that he believed that
no insult had been intended
AT Inc conclusion OF the argument Judge
Blair denied the motion and fixed Friday
June 49, for the commencement of the
hearing.
The proceedings began when Lawyer
Marshall A. Van Wrinkle, representing
| Mrs. Muir, entered his objections to the
order for the appointment of an admnis-
traitor pendente lite prepared by Judge
Abel l. Smith at the request of the Court.
Mr.. Van Wrinkle said that the order as
prepared was not in line with the facts of
the decision.
Judge Smith replied that he had fol-
lowed the Courts languarge as closely as
possible.
The main point of the objection was
that the order read that all the rest
and residue of the estate after providing
for the business of Mcpherson & Co,
shall be under the joint control of Mr..
Baldwin and Judge Otto Grouse, who was
appointed administrator pendente lite Mr..
| Van Wrinkle insisted that the Courts de-
cision left that part of the estate entirely
| in Mr.. Crouse's control.
Another objection was the statement
that the. prayer of the petitioner had been
denied, but for certain reasons the court
had consented to appoint Mr.. Grouse to
assist Mr.. Baldwin. The contestants S
| lawyer declared that the court had not
denied the application for the appoint
ment of an administrator pendente lite
| Judge Blair said:-s"The Court has not
had time to peruse the order as prepared
by Juoge Smith. Perhaps both sides claim
a little more than they are entitled to
under the decision and. the Court will
| itself prepare an order which will be ready
tomorrow"
Lawyer Albert c. Wall, who is asso-
ciated with Mr.. Van Wrinkle for the con-
| testant, then asked in what shape the ap-
the Court.
Judge Blair replied that although he had
intimated his inclination to refuse, the
question was still an open once.
Mr. Wall then read the complimentary
reference to Mr.. Baldwin contained in the
| Courts decision on the motion for the
appointment of an administrator pendente
/ lite. He said
1--WE desire to thank your Honor for
your frankness in admitting this convic-
| tion and we feel that your Honor will
take the same position taken by mem
bers of the Court of Errors in cases
| Will be readily seen that we are obliged
| to overcome a conviction in favor of one
! of the parties to the contest and we feel
1 as if it was too much of burden to put
| upon u.s. We do not feel in the least
| alarmed, nor do we feel that we are in
any way rejecting on the court in calling
this matter to its attention. Your Honors
| frankness in expressing your opinion re-
| garding Mr.. Baldwin seems to us a sub
stantial reason why the case should be
certified to a jury.
Counsel may cover his intimation with
any words lle may, replied Judge Smith,
| but to say the Court, because of his ac-
| quailtance with the character of one of
the parties, cannot form an unbiased
| opinion on the merits of the case is in
| sulting to the court
Continuing, Mr. Smith said that his cli-
entS had some rights in the matter He
declared that there were too many legal
points involved to have the case deter
mined by a jury 1.-THE first ground for
their application said Mr.. Smith, was
that it was a substantial reason and in
stirring around to find one they could find
none but this. The question is whether
| this is a good and substantial reason to
send the case to jury. Practice has
shown that it has resulted very unsat-
isfactorily when cases of this kind have
been sent to jury and this mode OF
procedure has almost been abandoned.
This is a large estate which should be
speedily settled and the course suggested
means delay, with its accompanying EN-
barrassment AS far as l can find there
| is not a single case of this kind tried by
a jury that has not been set aside by the
| Ordinary on review. No jury is able to
properly pass upon the evidence and ap-
| ply the law in case like this.
Now with no substantial reason for
| their application, they come here and say
that because you said you had respect for
| / repeat, that is an insult TO this Court
no matter in what language it is clothed
! II expected that in some such cheap
way said Mr.. Wall, counsel would at
| tempt to embroil me with the Court I
| have not insulted the Court, and if
| had the Court is powerful enough to
| punish me without Judge Smith raising
| his strong right arm to assist 1t may
/! be that the case will so develop that Mr..
| BaldWin's character will be one of the
| elements of the case
| Lawyer e. A. S. Lewis, who represents
| Christ Hospital, one of the residuary
motion for a trial by jury. He said the
| two points involved, whether. undue influ-
| ence was used and whether the testatrix
1 had testamentary capacity, were ques-
| tions Of both law and fact and should be
| determined by the judge.
| Lawyer Tracey, of Thatcher, Reed, Bar
mum & Thatcher, of New York, as the
/ representative of Yale college, the prin-
| cipal residuary legatee under the will
also opposed the motion. He was follow
| ed by Lawyer Burlingame of the Union
! Tru ompany, in whose custody the
| bonds, ETC., of the estate now are.
Judge Blair said that he did not place
as extravagant Interpretation on the re-
marks of counsel for the contestant as
| did Judge Smith. He said he had intend
1 ed to say that he had entire confidence in
/ Mr.. Baldwin and II the entire estate had
| be properly cared for. Continuing the
1 Court said
i Notwithstanding all that has been said
4 the Court cannot escape tile conviction
4 that this case should be tried by he
4 court. The questions involved are pe-