Evening star., 1932-04-24

full widow of the deceased and that she was
married to the general in Philadelphia on
August 6, 1845, but by whom she did not know,
except that Van Ness addressed him at the
time as Mr.. Alderman"
Naturally, since the question of marriage and
widowhood were matters of fact this phase of
the case had to be settled by the Circuit Court,
and for this purpose a jury was impaneled,
which included Thomas Orme as foreman, z.
Jones' William Henry Craig, Peter Hepburn,
J. Hepburn. Thomas ]. Triplett, william Easily,
William Bird, -- Storm, George w. Stewart,
John Suter and Henry Trunnel. The case
came on for trial at the october term Of court,
1916, and, finally, on January l. 1847 the court
took the case from the jury because Of lack of
evidence.
Usually, the press Of bygone days did not
devote much space to such matters, but this
case being an exceptional one, the Intelligencer
printed the following statement:
"Close Of the Van Ness Case. On Wednesday
after the preparation and sealing of IL bills
Of exception the part of the plaintiff IL.
this case, Mr.. Brent asked the privilege of
addressing the jury upon the evidence of the
case. The court denied that there was any
evidence before the jury, and refused to hear
further argument upon the testimony. One
OF the jurors, Mr.. Easily asked leave to be
absolved from rendering a verdict agreeably to
the instructions of the court, as he stated that
he could not conscientiously do so. The court
said that no evidence was before the jury, and
the responsibility rested with the court
After some consultation, the foreman of the
jury asked the court if IL Jurors could make
a verdict. The court said they could not Mr.
Easily was then allowed to retire from the jury
box. and the remaining II jurors returned to
the court paper, stating, in the form of a
verdict, that, under the instructions, they find
that Mrs. Mary Ann Van Ness is not the widow
of John P. Van Ness The return Of the jury
was then recorded, and the jury discharged.
The jurors then informed the respective
counsel In the case that, without the instruc-
tion OF the court, they stood seven for sustain
ing the marriage and five in opposition thereto.
Thus for the present ends the Van Ness case
having occupied the unremitting attention of
the court. jurors and the counsel for 4s days
THE counsel was not satisfied at the ruling of
the court, and even went 50 far as to ex-
press their feelings in card published in the
press which said:
AS counsel OF Mary A. Van Ness IN the
case just tried and decided against her by the
associate judges of the Circuit Court of this
District we feel it to be our professional duty
In this public way to state that it is her de-
termination, under our advice, to prosecute
an appeal from this decision to the Supreme
Court.
We do this that all persons whom it may
concern may not suppose her suit to be ended.
or her claims abandoned
We believe that her cause is just, and have
the satisfaction to know that majority Of the
Jurors sworn in the case are of the same
opinion 1t must, therefore, finally prevail
against every obstacle judicial or otherwise.
Happily for the rights of our client, she is
not quite trendless, and the doors Of the