The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1920-03-16
TRUSTEES WILL
NOT COMPROMISE
Will Enter Into No NegO-
tiatiOn With Threats
Pending
DEMURRER HEARING
SET FOR MARCH %
Surface Indications Forecast FIGHT m
Finish, but Several Contemplated
Movements May Alter Aspect of
Thompson Case

30 far as can be judged by surface
indications there is to be finish fgbt
in the matter of the petition of the town
OF Brattlcboro and the seamstresses' So
elety for the removal of Richards NJ
bradley of Boston as one of the trustees
OF the Thomas Thompson estate of over
million dollars.
several matters are pending, however.
the outcome of which cannot be fore.
shadowed, and which may change the
complexion OF things.
In The Reformer of March II il was
stated that a compromise might be
reached whereby a committee would be
named to whom Brattleboro's share Of
the income of the estate would be turned
over by the trustees to be expended.
lhls statement was made after consulta.
'ion with attorneys in the case in Brat
tIeboro, and the scheme seemed to appeal
iavorabiy to counsel on both sides.
That this plan does not appeal favor
ably to Boston counsel for the trustees is
apparent from the following Letter from
apparent from the following letter from
Attorney Stoughton Bell of the Boston
law firm of Putnam, Putnam & Bell:
Editor of The Reformer:
| notice in your issue of March II
that the suggestion is made that a com.
mttee IS to be appointed to expend the
income OF the Thomas Thompson Trust
IN Brattleboro | must repeat what
said at the conference referred to in that
news article that the trustees of the
Thomas Thompson Trust are subject ia
the will which is a Massachusetts will
Iprobated in the Massachusetts court: and
that they cannot and will not enter into
! any negotiation while there is pending
against them or either Of them. threats
Of removal.
| Yours very truly,
| STOUGHT0N BELL
Boston, March 13
| From the last part of Mr.. Bells letter
| it might be inferred that the defens,
would be ready to talk compromise i
! the petitioners withdrew their petition
for Mr. Bradeys removal, but it is pre-
sumed that the petitioners will not d,
so without some definite assurance as t.
the course which the defense would pur
sue. The parties have named March ,:
tentatively as the date for beginning tn,
! t'thtllS VI testimony before waiter
Frederick of Boston, whom Judge JOIN
lC. Crosby recently appointed master fo
that purpose Some other proceedings
however, may operate to postpone th'
taking of testimony.
Some time ago the trustees filed a de
murrer to the petition for removal on th
ground that the bin was multifalious ii
that it sought several remedies III tn
same BILL Judge Crosby ruled that tn
demurrer be stricken from the record
and that the trustees file their answer t.
the petition. The trustees did so but il
Their answer came back with the denur
rer as before, and on this a hearing j
set for March % in Boston before .Iudg
De Couray.
Assistant Attorney General LelanC
Powers of Boston has given notice t
both sides that he is to file a bill for in
! structions, in the nature of an informa
ion, as previously stated in The Re
former. This probably win be fled with
in a few days and it is likely to have it
bearing on the future proceedings in th
case