The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1904-08-13

Continued from First Page.1
ldowment fund which is the principal
fund Of the school. This endowment was
given to the school by Mr.. Morgan of
New York, the founder of the school.
The compliments ask for the removal
of the trustees and that they be COM
lpelled to make good any deficiency
which there might be. The case was
referred to Henry G. White Of New Ha-
ven, as committee to investigate. Up
to that time the firm of Alling,
Webb & Morehouse were the counsel
flor the states attorney, Mr.. Whites
decision was in favor of the trustees
land this firm then dropped all interest
lin the case, Attorney Charles Perkins
.Eof Hartford and Attorney Seymour
lie. Loomis Of this city appearing in their
lstead.
These gentlemen filed remonstrance
Ito the. report of the committee and
Judge shumway, of the superior court,
loyerruIed the remonstrance after a
lhearing. The attorneys for the de-
Pendants then moved the acceptance OF
1.-THE report of the committee and also
flor Judgment in favor Of the defend
alants. IS
j Judge Shumway rendered a Judgment
lin favor Of the defendants, and the
plaintiffs then appealed the case to the
6lsupremie court and by the decision Of
THAT court handed down by Judge Tor
france yesterday the decision of the SUI
Iperior court is upheld. no error being
found. The trustees who were the de-
PENDANTS in the case are George E. Ell
Iliott, Charles Elliott, Andrew Hurd and
james Wellnan. The decision handed
down yesterday completely exonerates
these gentlemen. Of all--the- charges
which were made against them An
lother interesting feature Of this case
lis the fact that when the action was
Originally brought it was brought by
Mr.. Murdoch, who was at that time
states attorney Mr.. Murdoch died
Isome time ago, and since then the case
has been carried on by Mr. Haines, his
successor. The firm Of Harrison & Zach
Ter appeared for the trustees,
The decisions in the. other cases hand
led down yesterday We're as follows;
lSoper ct al. VS.. Tyler, no error, opinion
Iby Baldwin, all agree; Norris vs.. New
Haven, error, Judgment set aside and
lcause remanded; HamersIey. Radezky
let al. VS.. Sargent & Co., no error; Ham.
ersley. Watson VS.. Bigelow Co, error
land new trial granted: Torrance. sterr
Tvs. Barnes, no error; Hamersley. Hay
wood VS.. Hamm error, and new tria
lordered Baldwin. Peck VS.. the Fail
Haven &c Westville r. r. Co., error ant
cause remanded; Hail. Sloan VS.
Smith, no error; Torrance. New Ha
ven VS.. Hotchkiss. no error; Hall
Douglas VS.. Unmack, ct al, error and
lnew trial ordered; Baldwin. Benham e
jal. VS.. Potter ct al, error and judgment
reversed Prentice. Downer ct al. VS.
I Clark ct ALL, superior court advised tt
sustain demurrer; Prentice. Storrs
adm, vs. Robinson ct ux., error, judg
ment set aside and cause ren1anded
Torrance. Bradley vs. Graham, erro
and new trial ordered: Baldwin. Stat
Tvs. Beers, no error, per curtain opinion
Bronson ct al. VS.. Thompson ct al.
Judgment advised for defendants; Bald
win. Fair Haven & Westville r. r. Co
Tvs New Haven, error in part and caus
, remanded; Prentice Miller, executor
!! VS.. Metcalf ct al, superior court advises
\ to render judgment in accordance witt
Y the construction given to the will an,
Y Ecodicil as per exhibit CA" Torrance.