New-York tribune., 1921-10-29
Stilllnan Fights
Wife's s Petition
InCuardianship
She Lacks Business Ability,
While Funds of Two Sons
Arc Prospering Under His
Care, Surrogate Is Told
Gifts Constitute Trusts
Boys Not Specific Benefi.
Charles by Crandfather's
Will; Decision Reserved

Surrogate Cohalan heard argument
and reserved decision yesterday on the
application of Mrs. Anne u. Stillman,
wife Of James A. Stillman, to be ap-
pointed general guardian Of the per-
son and property of her sons, James,
seventeen years old, and Alexander,
eleven. Neither principal was in court,
but both were represented by counsel.
=, Outer!bridge Horsey, of counsel for
Mr. Stillman, told Surrogate Cohalan
that Mrs. Stillman's petition created an
impression that was not justified. The
two sons. whose guardianship their
mother wishes to assume, are not spe-
cifc benehciaries under the will of
their grandfather, the late James Still
man, said the attorney.
Mr. Horsey added that the only
funds the boys are interested in con-
slst almost entirely Of Christmas and
birthday gifts made by their grand
father and father, including 12O shares
of stock of the National City Bank
and other stocks. In the case of James,
Mr.. Horsey continued, the fund
amounts to S157,310, which brings an
income of s11, 1886 a year, which CON
sidering the present market depres-
sion, Mr.. Horsey though was a fair re-
turn. The fund of Alexander, in the
hands of his father. amounts to $1,000
and nets $128 year.
Referring to Mr.. Stillman's divorce
action pending in Westchester County,
Mr.. Horsey said the court there had
ruled that It should be left to the sons
as to which parent they wished to be
with from time to time. To have q
ruling by the Surrogates' Court at this
time on the application of Mrs. Still
man, it was suggested by counsel,
might produce conflicting results. He
felt no action should be taken by Sur
rogate Cohalan, pending the outcome
of the divorce proceedings.
Mr.. Horsey protested against the
funds of the two Stillman boys being
taken from the custody of their father,
who, he said, had conserved and man
aged them skillfully, and being placed
in the hands of Mrs. Stillman, who, he
added, never invested a cent of the
holdings and possessed no business
ability. He asked that the application
of Mrs. Stillman be denied, but if the
Surrogate should decide that guar
dian of the property should be ap-
pointed that he name Mr.. Stillman or
some trust company in preference to
Mrs. Stllman.
Judge William F. Bleakley, of Yon-
kers, argued in behalf of Mrs. Stillman.
He said that the sons, following the
ruling. in Westchester County, had
elected to live with their mother, who
was bearing the expense of their main
tenance. He declared that MIR. Stillman
was the self-constituted trustee of the
funds belonging to his sons. James.
said Judge Blakeley had never received
any of the income from the larger
fund, and as the boy is now seventeen
years old he has a right through a
guardian to have some knowledgc of
his property and control over it.
The sole interest Of Mrs. Stillman in
her sons, according to her attorney, is
their care and welfare, and, he added.
she possesses the necessary ability and
is thoroughly equipped to care for their
material as we'll as physical welfare.