New Britain herald., 1916-05-29
LAWYERS WRANGLE
 AT CLARK HEARING
Atty. 0'COnnell Of New Haven Re- CeiVeS Verbal RebufS from Others HE CONTINUALLY OBJECTS
Session in Court of Probate Over Ac- counting of Administrator Schultz Remarks of Members of the Bar.

Enlivened by Repartee and Caustic
 Remarks of Members of the Bar.
 Another chapter was added to the famous Clark estate series of hear l ings, arguments and court proceed Joseph H. Clark through Attorney ] Timothy O'Connell of New Haven for l a final accounting as administrator by 1 EdWln w. schultz was heard. Tn com- i pllance With the desires of the Joseph Clark interests Judge Gaffney se- cured Judge l.. P. Waldo Marvin of Hartford to preside
 The hearing was scheduled to 1 commence at Ii o'clock, but the ab- l sence of the counsel for the petition made the proceedings late in starting. Representing the other mem bers of l the estate were Attorney P. F. Me- Donough for John J. Clark, Kirkham | S cooper for Miss Elizabeth Clark l Watkins and Klett & Alling for the administrator
 Lawyers Have Tilt
 When the hearing opened Attorney ] O'Connell called Bernard Clark, the
 
 his side and questioned him in re- gard to how he secured information l regarding todays hearing MT. Clarke l answered that he had read 1t in the papers.
 Have you counsel today?' queried Attorney O'Connell. Mr. Clark ap- peared somewhat mudd1ed and in an undertone answered that he supposed MT. McDonough was his lawyer
 Attorney McDonough explained that he was present in the interests of John J. Clark and not of Bernard Clark.
 Again the Elm city lawyer put the question regarding who was appear ing for him, and MT. Clark answered. T suppose MT. McDonough is" Addressing Attorney O'Connell, Lawyer McDonough answered sharp ly, T will have you understand that I am here in John C1ark's interests and not Bernard Clark's and that is all I want to hear in regard to the matter"
 Getting down to the facts in the case Attorney O'Connell said that on May f he petitioned for her. ing on the preliminary report of the administrator and for the re- moval of MT. Schultz. On the fol- lowing day MT. Camp was asked to issue a notice calling for the hearing. On May 6, the speaker said he un- 1 derstood that a preliminary report was submitted by MT. Schultz. He also said that no notice had been is- sued by the court on the matter. | Through a reporter and one of the l employees of ojce he learned that an adjournment was to be taken on i the matter until today. On May i he agin petitioned for a final hear i ing and said if the accounts of the administrator were not satisfactory he would ask for his removal Atty. O'ConnelI Objects-and Objects. The administrator then presented his account, which in many instances was objected to by Attorney O'Con- nell alone, none of the other lawyers finding any objection to the items. Mr. Schultz said that he was named as administrator of the estate of Bridget Clarke on April 26, 1913, and quali- fled on May 1 of the same year. This was after the petitioner had been re- moved from the place by the court His duties were to collect the DOT ton of repts due to the remaining mem bers of the estate. the debts and other repairs and disbursements be- ing divided between the portion man. aged by him and that of Joseph Clark
 In speaking of the sections ob- iected to by the New Haven attor- ney Mr. Schultz said that section B. expenditures of s5,385.63 was for taxes, repairs, etc, property at 5O5 Main street which have all been paid.
 Section 1. bills of $14 and s15 against John H. Clarke and Joseph Clark was for use Of driveway. The bills were made out in proportionate form.
 Has these bills ever been paid" asked Judge Klett.
 Not from Joe Clark, the bills have been presented replied MT. Schultz Attorney O'Connell began another series, of objections that pro- , longed the proceedings considerably ir regard to Judge Klett advising his client.
 Section G., which covered some deals for sale of property, was the next grounds for a long parleying. Judge Klett asked MT. Schultz to ex- plain the selling of a lot on West street to James Prendergast for $1,- 500 also lots on Talcott and West streets for S1,400 and S2,000. MT. Schultz explained that this was done with the approval of the other mem bers of the family, also that of At torney Buck and Attorney Burke who were representing Joseph Clark at the time. Questioned by his counsel as to whether Attorney Buck was pres ent when the matters were complet- ed Attorney O'Connell raised a howl of protest against what he considered coaching by Judge Klett Hot Shot From ENIett.
 eff you do less talking, we will get