The New York Herald Newspaper, July 3, 1875, Page 11

THE COURTS. Mme. Cruger’s Will and Cod- icil Rejected. Important Decision by Surro- gate Hutchings. JUDGE ROOSEVELI’S WILL IN COURT. Tweed’s Motion to Quash Indict- ments Denied. THE CLAFLIN & CO. INDICTMENTS. United States Minister Schenck on the Lawrence Case. There was a farther examination of witnesses yesterday im the Court of Oyer and Termimer in the Robert Wishart case. No new facts of impor- tance were elicited. Juage Barrett will hold Supreme Court, Cham- bers, during the montn of July. No court will be held on Monday, the Sth, The frst Monday mo- tion calendar will be taken up on Tuesday. Court opens at hall-past ten A. M. for ex parte business. Tne calendar will be called each day at twelve p’clock M. Jadge Blatchfora is at Newport, spending bis yummer vacation, He will return on the 13th of the present month and on the 3d of August to hear motions and attend to the Chambers busine: dn \he Birdsall slander case, held before Judge McAqam and a special jury, in Marine Court, Part 4,and which occupied the Court two days, the jury disagreed, On being questioned by the Judge, the foreman announced that there was no probability of their agreeing. Under these cir- cumstances the Court, with the concurrence of counsel om either side, discharged the jury, and so ended this extraordinary case, The case in which Charney I, Sprague was charged with using caecks on which counterfeit internal revenue stamps were engraved was re- sumed yesterday, in the United States Circuit Court, before Judge Benedict, who at the conclu- sion of the evidence and the summing up of coun- sel, charged the jury taat 1t was simply 4 question of whether they believed Raymona, the main wit- ness for the prosecution. The jury retired about five o'clock, and, up toa late hour last evening, had not agreed upon a verdict. Altera trialofeight days the jury in the Kelly lunacy case have iound that Kelly is erson of sound mind, On benalfof the petitioner 1t was sought to be shown that Kelly was the victim of what isknown as ‘general paralysis of the in- Bane.? The cross-examination of the medica) witnesses by ex-Judge Curtis, counsel ior Kelly, demonstra@ted how little physictans in general practice Know about the subject of mental aliena- tom, Qu behalfot Kelly it was urged that the whole thiog was a conspiracy to get possession of bis property, and that he was not insane, but simply suffering from partial physical paralysis, By consent of ceunsel and permission of the Board o! Commissiouers counsel were allowed half an hour each to sum up. The jury found in favor ofthe respondent, Messrs. Colid & Huil appeared for the petitioner and ex-Judge Curtis for the re- spondent Kelly. Application was made yesterday in the Court of Oyer and Terminer, before Judge Davis, by Mr. John D, Townsend, to admit to bail Duncan D, Templeton, convicted in the Court of General Ses- sons of shooting his wife with intect to kill her And sentenced to State Prison jor seven years, The application, which was oased on tne decision of the Court of Appeals gramting Templeton a new trial, Was granted and the ball Mixed at $5,000, which being speedily furnished, Templeton was ree leased irom his long confinement in the City Prison. Asult has been commenced in the Supreme Court in this city by the Bank of Scotiand, Gl: gow, to recover of Alexander Corrie & Co, $97,312, alleged to be due on draits drawn by the latter ana accepted by John Strahan & Co, Jadge Dono- hue yesterday granted an attachment against the property oi Corrie & Co. to cover the amount @iaimed. THE CRUGER WILL. THE Witt or 1868 anpD copici, or 1869 px- CLARED INVALID—IMPORTANT DECISION BY SURROGATE HUTCHINGS. On the 84 day of January, 1868, Mrs. Harriet Dougias Cruger, then seventy-nine years of age, executed a willleaving the bulk of ber estate in equal shares to the American Bible Society and the Board of Foreign Missions, bequeathing but a very small portion of her estate to her next of kin. In July, 1869, she executed a codicil direct- ing the sale of the residuary estate and its con- version into money, the proceeds togo absolutely to the two reiigious societies reierred to. When Presented for probate the will anu codicil were contested by next of kin, and the case has been im contest lor @ considerable time in the Surro- pate’s Court, erday Surrogate Hutchings, ina long and very interesting decision, rejects both will and codicil, of which the suvjoined is a summary :— Surrogate flutcnings says:—I have carefully considered the voluminous vestimony in this case, oud alsv the abie arguments of the respe Counsel, Which present au CXliaustive analys 7 wtiMony and mos, learned expositions of the science Wiich seeks to deiine tue distinction oO the evidence, aided by t a testumentary B and the authorities cited, I have to decide the questions, first, whether the deceaent, Mrs, Har- fet Douglas Cruger, tne 8d day of Japuary, 1868, When the instiument presented for probate as a will Was executed, and secoudly, whetuer n tue 20th day of July, 1860, when the paper, of- ed 48 @ COdicll to BUCK will Was executed, wus Of sufficient mental capacity to make a testament. Bry disposition of her propert, it is estuuiished beyoud reasonaple dor think, that in Marca, 1867, the decedent w. tainly incapable of making a valid will, ten Months tiereuiter, Wen she Was seventy-nine yeurs of age, the piper offered as her will was executed in accordance with the required legal formalities, Highteen mouths thereafter tue alleged codicil was ¢@. her counsel, to cure & po: previous iustrument, My Statutory ieqairements for ob. feived, It 18 conceded tht, at a period subi quent fo tnis last date, the decedent jell into a condition of absolute demeutia, which continued Qutil her death, cariy tn 1872, ‘rhe decedeut is shown to have been a woman of inberited fortune, O! superior education, higa social position, imbued with great pride of ances- ry, Ng affection for kindred und an earnest believer in the tenets of the Presbyterian Caurcn, of whico she had been jor over nity years a mem- ber. im the maturity of her mentai Vigor sue con- tracted @ Marriage Which resuitea uufortuuately for her happiness, as It Was oon iuliowed by a Separation aud alaw suit, which coutinued tor over eight years, juvoiving tue rights of ber hus. band in her estate, under @ posi-nuptial seitie- ment vetween them, No issue proceeued trom the marriage, Her nearest of kin surviving are a she wreatest ations, Soe had, in succe: aleays aifediion and y rr e legaiand tes- tamentary ibatrumenis, rom 1833 to 1664, and b; Verbal and writtea veo rations, expr intenuion to hold ine principal part of her jor & Heilt Oo: her relauives. Lavuxtu 1b Ou tamentary paver she bequeathed & sail bene! MOD to w slogie Charitabie Object. Jt is conceded that to tae year 1866 the decedent Was of rouDd inind. Wuile sue possessed great MeDtul Vigor, & strong Will And excolieat powers 0! entertaining couversation, the evidence shows \ he exbivited none of those qualiues aud characiermtics wmieh ate proven to have Urst wppeared during that year, as con soquebt upon ” sever@ iinesws, and wiica peculiarities. itis elsimed, continued in & more or less marked ceyree anu moditew torm Until her death in 1872 Mer Pas yaaa nad al- Ways been ladyilke, as might bs expecteu of a Woman of such superior DoLUral gilts, excelient educa'ion, anu Whose life had always veen in the best Circles of society in her native city aud iu the country Of ber aucesiry, Sne Was, besiaes, a indy 9 cultivated iiterary tasies. All the witnesses, Provessonel avd ly, admit that sie possessed & strong and Active mind und an intelligent compre- vensivn Of ley auaire wgd of her relutivus to ee eee tiers, to the year 1866, wnen there was exhibited #@ harked change in her characteristica; and, wntever disputes may arise as to her ineutal comiition in the pores succeeding until ber deah, i¢ cap hardly be denied that she never aiteward showed these eminent migi which had belore distinguishes higler circles of society in this city. ‘Thag tt Will be see that the scheme of the paper propounded as @ will was first suggested by the decident early in S*ptember, 1806, at a time Wag she Was insane, and which state itis ad- pited, as 1 understand, or 18 shown tu have contnued for fuliy six months, until the midale of Ma 1867, when Dr. Parker, and also oir. O’Caor, relying upon the opinion of the former, beliered her incapavle of making a testamentary instyment. ‘The scheme of the wil, I am satis- fied, Vas the outgrowth of fears for ber spiritual safetj, caused vy the insanity that overcame her in March, 1866, 1ts marked variance from the pre- viousuniform declarations of her ile, testamen- tary md otherwise, shows that some powerful motive must have impelled her change of pur- ose, Walle her positive declarations to Rev. Dr. ‘aXtan and to others, show that she was con- vinced that her soul’s salvation could only be securdl by waking the pew disposition sue pre- posed, Qi this iuea Rev. Dr. Paxton could never isabube her bund. , Lis earianony shows to My mind that on the oc- casiouol the execution of the will he was merely or scatcely more tan a spectator, engaging in no copveisation with the decedent except that which would have Occurred on the part ol any nou-proles- sional Iriend who happened to be present. Hence, as it seems tO me, ot understanding tne re- sponsivility which Mr, O’Conor supposed he had then wsumed, Dr, Parker having in the occasional revieus Interviews observed her great improve- ment and & more rational conduct ana deport. meet and remurking that her conversation at aaiities of her in the those times, on the limited range of topics pales i of, seemed to be iu accordauce with her Rabit be- fore ihe attack, uid not douvt the decedent’s ca- pacity to muke w will, and especially a4 she seemed to understand what she was doing. What nis cenclusion would have been had he made a critical examination o1 her case 1a repeated con- ver-alops upon the subjects which were the basis oi her deiusions from early in 1866 to the middie of Marct, 1867, must be leit to surmise, Iu respect to Mr, O’Conor it is evident that he acted with @ bigh sense of projessional care and responsibility in ail that he did, and that ae was un wiling to act, ‘ept upon what he supposed Was ‘he understanding that Dr, Parker would assume the determination of the question of tue decedeni’s sanity, Suvposing that Dr, Parker realized that he stood In that relation to the case, apd bo objection being interposed by him, Mr. O’Conor, a8 he Saw nothing in the decedeut’s lan- guage or conduct which appeared irrational, con- ceived Ittobe his outy, even if u doubt might €Xist, NOt FO risk an aggravation of her malady by a refusal to assist herin making @ will, winch it was clearly nis duty to do if sbe did possess mental capacity. It appears to me that where there has been, indisputably, au insane condition at a xlven ume, iu order to determine whether, at u subrequent period, there is what called a recovery, remission or lacid imterval, there must be much more than @ mere observa. tion o: the person or a@ resort tu those means which are apparent to the eye, so as to decide whether tbe seemiug composure may not be only ult of exhaustion or a condition of physical + aud perhaps the only efficacious or the surest test is to adaress the patient with ques- tions tbat bear some relation to the monomania or previous iorm of insanity. Opposition to, or dissent from, an opinion on a weil chosen topic would, if the insanity still existed in a latent torm, in all probability, Uf not certainly. cause the reap- pearance of the disease or its symptoms, in speech or action, while acquiescence or sile! would leave the person undisturbed in the calm enjoy- Inent or possession of the in! lusion which had previously Seen apparent; and there would probably in the latter case be no manifestation of deranged iaculties im @ violent or any aecided torm, ‘There are proximate and remote causes of the Manilestation of all forma of insanity, The suv- ject of property notable one, and it bas pot been an uncommon occurrence in my official e: perience and observation to be a witnei spicuous iostances. Persons nave vy. me, Wao, to all appearance, e entirely rational in their conduct and conversation, but who, when they approached or any reference was maae to The subject of some imagined injustice, for in- stance, their rights of property, themselves indubitably insane, because it was the subject as te which delusion existed or in regard to which the insanity Was prone to exhibit itself Most violently, and the s! couver=ution it necessary which are Du i! t reference to it in ite do mot deem any of the cases jound in the treatises observations respect- ing the characteristics of insane personas, or t! manner of detecting latent insanity, when, with- out such tests, appearances and acts May seem to be rational. Hence it 1s that physicians are oiten greatly perpiexed with doubt as to the mental conaltion .1a patient, and it is only by the most minute investigation and repeated interviews that his true condition Is discovered, in respect to soundness of mind. Next, upon anotner branch of the discussion, I appreciate the force of the argument of counsel for the proponents that a mere religious belief cannot be regarded in any respect as an insane delusion; nor can the belief which this decedent entertained, after her iliness in 1866, that she could purchase her soul’s salvation by works, be in any Way construed as an insane delusion, al- though the religious aenouination in the tenets of Which she Was educated and with which she ni been neariy all of her lite connected held that salvation conld be obtained by faith a Probably her pastor, Kev. Dr, Paxton, himself a distinguished thevlogian of the Presbyterian Church, Was started that this accomplished and inteiigent lady, who, he supposed, was deeply imbued with the doctrines of his denomination, should, $0 suddenly, have anuounced a religious conviction wie: opinion, was anti-Ser: tural, Yetit is qi whether the lar proportion of tue members of any religious de- nomibation may not tall intelligently and tully to comprehend muny of the doctrines and distine- vons involved ta the theelogy taught by its ex- peanases as cardinal or important points of iaity. he paper propounded as the codicil, whico is equally the subject of contest provides for the immedia Into money of the residu: estate by a trustee and the gilt of the proceeds absolutely to the two religious societies, instead of the income thereof only, a8 provided by the paper offered as the will, ‘The object of the codicil, tuerefure, was to make it certain that the wishes of the decedent should be carried outin respect to kiog the two so- cleties tne priucipal beneficiaries, which it was vhought by Mr. O’Vonor might not ve done, in view ofa possibile invalidity of the resiauary clause Ly the aileged will. lt appears that the codicil wus not at all sug- gested by the decedent, but only by the eminent counsel; and that even as late as the time of its execution she did not wish it to take effect, it the wiil could, aua that she gave @ reiuctant acquies- cence In its execution To meet & possible legal necessity or dificulty, Ihe cudteil is not a new scheme for the disposition of her whole estate, but 13 simply a change in the form of tne gift of the portion iutevdea to go to the two societies. lt refers to that porluon alone, Hence so tar the intenuons of toe decedent, expressed or indi- cated In the original paper, as to the beneficiaries Who sRou:d enjoy the gifts are concerned, they are not substantially uffected by the airections contained in the second, At the execution ol the allegea codici! the same formalities were ov- served as were followed on the execution of the former instrument eighteen months previous, betrayed to cite to be the will, ‘the same peisuns were present, ‘The at- testing witnesses, Mr, Brown and Mr. Belknap, testy that the same formalities Were voserved ay On the occusion of the execution Ol the previous ipstrument, Neither felt nimseif called upon to decide ior himself as to her dtness to muke a testamentary instrament, and each un- derstood shat the object of the execution of the new loatrument was to cure a legal deiect in the other. Mr. U'Conor, With the extreme caution Which he bad previously observed, notified Dr, Parker to be pies@nt on the occasion, and doubt. less with the sume object, that upon him might be pluced the responsibility of deciding the question of the decedent's sanity, Mr. O’Conor saw nothieg irravionul in her conouct, whieh was the same av On the previeus Cccasion, She assented, it 18 ap- parent, with some reiuctance to the change nD te «provision of the will, wud the usual formalities in the execution O1 tesia- mentary instruments were observed, Heuce, #0 jar as the testimony of the subgeriving witnesses is concerned, it fails to estabush u recovery of mental soundness since the period of the execution of the ailewed will, and neither oad geen her tn tue mterval, or had had apy means of informing himself as to her mental condition, The only Otuer Wwithess produced by tue pro- ponents on this point is Dr, Parker, who, wren he atrended at the execution in response to the call of Mr, O’Conor, made DO more eXamination into the meptai condition of the decedent to asvertaln Whetber the same dé@iasions continued, and what her mental conaition was, thun he had on tno execution of the Will; and the opinion be iormed of her capacity to make a codicil was irom what he saw On that occasion, when she seemed tu UDderstaud WHat 84¢ Was about, though his recol- lec: lon is very indistinct Oo! waat transpired; and be had not seen her for aoout eighty days previ+ ous to that ume, though at first he was of tne bevel that he had seen her io Jane, i have already expressed my views as to the true tests to be app ied to ascertain whether the de\usious that attended che decedent in the early riod of Ler i1DeSs, 1D 1866 And 1867, previous tu he execution of the aliegea will, still abided with her, Jhey apply with equal force, iu the consicer- @H0n of ihe Continuance, to the tite of Making tue wlieged codicil; especialiy 1D 4 cage where the instrument under consideration ls, in substance, identicul, And must Ce regarded, in Lhe absenve Of proof of why new motive or purpore, as based Upon the same insane Ideaia which it is known to have had its origin. As to the vudicil, also, there Was, tuerdiure, the same lack o1 teats to overcoine te presumption © the coutinuance of her inean- ity, unless in the other eviaence in the vase there 4s to be found prvol of w recovery of ber normal Mental coudiion surxequent to toe execution of the Oret instrument iu January, 1868, which other ev deuce | proceed to notice, Tue counse lur the proponents have adduced a jew facts, Which, It is cimimed, torow discredit upon the contesiaats and their witnesses. They way that Rev. Dr. Paxton, while believing tne cecedent to be Msane, yet administered the sac- rament to her at her vesideave. But is is not dif- feat 10 recoucile such a winistration, uncer the ircumserances, LO & conscientious Jeellag of ObIl- ation on the part of her clergyman, for u tuere Were a lucia interval at the time it was a duty, Gud If her goudition Were otherwise to degiine tu administer the rite would or might have aggrae vated her case, Walle it Was possible that the periormance of the ceremony would merci- fully quiet or soothe her condition. In suca | a case he might well decide to err, if at all in favor of the decedent’s com/‘ort and the en- tire discharge 01 his cierical duties, The counsel for proponen:s algo say that decedent's niece, Mrs. Robingun, & contestant, acted as her aman- uensis In conducting a correspondence tn reler- ence to the uunuity to Miss Caroline Crager, and which was the subject of Mr. Whetven’s inter- view with the decedent, already referred to; and they also refer to the execution by the decedent, SIX Mouths atter the codictl, of w tormal paper appointing two of the contestants, Mr. Douglas ahd Mrs, Robinson, trusiees under the will of her mother, Having thus reviewed the case, and, as minutely as seemed necessary, discussed the testimony, It becomes my duty to reject both the will and cod- cil AS invalid, on the ground that, at the time of their execution, the decedent was not of sound mind, memory or understandnig capacitating her to make such instruments, in arriving eat this ‘conclusion I have had no occasion to cousider any question of undue influence or the use of any means, exerted by others, to control tue mind Of the decedent, or improperiy to inavee her to make the bequest to the religious societies relerred to, as there 1s no evidence of that kind or reason to believe that any soca influence was at- tempted, The controversy has been essentially one Of testamentary capacity only; but itis @ re- markabie case im many respects. and the facts de- veloped have been so eXtraerdiuary in churacver as to demand the closest examination and most careful consideration. {u generalization of tre whole matter it appears that a lady, of nearly eighty years of age, uotil tue year 1866 distinguished for natural eudowments, superior acquirements and social position, and possessed Of a sirong will, in consequence of or Immediately following @ fail in that year, sud- denly passes into w violent state Of insane terror, und suffers under the hallucination of the personal presence of the devil and the exist- ence of fire under her bed to tormeut and destroy her; which manitestatious of ceraugement, among others, continued, With @ greater or less uegree of violence, several months, during which she con- ceived the idea of averting those ieariul presences und evils, and of secariug the salvation of ner soul, by the scheme of 4 will which would give the bulk of ber properly after death to religious uses, and accordingly, in September, 1866, Mr. C. F. Southmayd, w prominent lawyer of this city, was consulted and requested to prepare such a paper; but ne declined to be instrumental in 80 aoing, believing her to be incompetent to make a will. Thong her mental condition had become less violent than before siuce her fall, still he found her conversation inconerent, und was so con- vinced of her unsoundness of mind that he was unwilling to act furtuer tn the matier, Her mind remained disordered until Feoruary or March, 1807, When, again, sne caused eminent counsel, Mr. O'Conor, to be sent for to prepare substan- Ually such a will as she had previoasly wished Mr. Southmayd to araw; vat Mr. O’Conor, on learning Unat her mental condition had been impaired the year belore, Was 30 much in doubt that he wished to be assured ol her recovery; and therefore deemed It advisable to have the attendance of De. Willard Parker, o1 great aistinction 1p the medi- cal projession, and who ended the deceuent in her Ulness the previous year, to determiue the question o! her savity, for the purpose of muking a will, When Dr. Parker pronounced her then to be still sufering trom mental deravgement, and, in fact, to be insane ; $o that the execution of suca an instrument at that me was thereoy pre- vented. Later in the year, in Deeember,"Mr. O’Conor Was again sent for for tue same purpose, and he Was caunous and doubtful as belore; but concluded to acs for her in the engrossmeat of the will, substantially as beiore prepared, qisposing largely oO! ner property ter the use of the sams two religious corperations previously designated, and to superintend its execution, but not, however, unless Dr, Parker should attend at the time lor whe purpose of judging of tne dece- dent’s mental condition; and i! the doctor passed nO UNiavorable judgment respecting it, ana le, Mr, O’conor, saw nothing manifestly irrational in her conduct or conversation, then he would be willing to proceed in tre completion of the wu mentary act. Mr. O’Couor aud Dr. Parser so at- vended, with two other gentlemen to act scribing witnesses, in January, 1868, ie alleged will Was tuen executed; but, though Dr. Parker expressed no adverse opinion Oi her sanity at that time, he made no examination ana employed no questions or conversaiuon on subjects upon which the decedent’s iu- sanity had before most shown itself to lest its continued existence ur to learn her lutent and reu! mental condition; neither did Mr. O’Conor or the subscribing witnesses do go, tne oceasion appearing to have been but little, if any, more than one oO! the jormal execution of a paper as a will, though, accoraing to Dr. Parker, tue Gecedent seemed to understand wuat she was duing. Nothing special seems to have been done by aby person present to show but that the provi- sions oj the will for religious uses were assented to by her while laboring under, or but that her acquiescence was Owing Co, the latent insanity in whose hallucinations and celusions the scheme of the will Was coucelved, walle in @ more violent or more apparent condition oO! disordered faculties in 1866, until which time she had ever consistently expressed her imtention to dispose o1 her estate or to keep it Jor her kindred, and any seem composure, at the time ol execution ol tue will, was consistent with the actual continuance of tbe mal ady ; lor, by means Of such @ Will us was signed, had sought and thus found relief from the terrors and insane delusions with which her insanity Dad flied ner mind. The subscribing witnesses per- formed only tue formal duty expected or required of them, as such; Dr, Paiker did not realize that he waa there to make any critical cxamioation of the decedeni’s sanity, and therefore made pone; while Mr, O’Conor, understanding that the re- sponsibility or office of such an examination rested ou Dr. Parker, Wuv luterposed no opjectiun to her capacity, and (hough watchful, but observ- ing nothing in the decedert’s language or con. duct that appeared irrational, assumed no sponsibility himself on that subject. still ne deemed it professionally obligatory upon him, even Li a douvt exisied, Dot to hazard the aggra- vation of the decedeut’s malady by @ refusal to actturther in the mat but a duty so to act, if she Was, at the time, mentally capabie, No med- ical expert bad exumined the decedent between the time of the clearly established insanity—in March, 1867—and tne date of the will, to determine ther her malady and insane delusions did Lot } and, im the absence oi evidence to jactorily that there bad been a recovery (Which i# uot proven), the insanity must be deemed to bave coatinued until the time oi the execution—in January, 186$—o1 the instrument in question, incorporatiug the scheme of religious bequests, taat had its origin while soe was insaue, And, though months had elapsed since tbe scheme was cunceived, the testamentary purpose which had spruug irom her insanity and frou the feartal haliucinauons and delusions Which were its effect, and iu which it had most strikingly mani- fested lisell, was So deeply seated that no vempo- rary subsidence or remission of tue violence ct her condition removed it, And, as if meradicable, is was long persisted 1p, and in no substantial respect changed or modified, through two unsuc- cessful attempts ior Its execurion, notwithstand- ing diseppolotmeant irom the unwillingness of abie and discreet counsel (0 assis¢ her in edecting it, aud sull longer afterward, until the alleged wiil was executed under the circumstances stated. Laver, im July, 186, at tne suggestion of Mr. O’Cunor, & codicil Was prepared and executed by her, as # part of the original scheme, witn the in- tention, Dot of changing the substance of the be- quest to the two societies, but tue lorm only, in order Lo cure & possivle iegal defect in the moae of vesting the gilt; bus the decedent was, then, in @ less Capauie, or in uo better state to make such @X istiument; and tne same precautions were then taken by Mr. O’Conor tu avoid ro- aponsibility on the question of her sanity, vy pro- cnring the attendaucs of Dr. Parker; bat there Was (ben, a8 a: the execution of the will, te same lack of tests of her meuta! couaition, and there transpired on che occasion but little more than legal igrmalities on the part of decedent and tne otners presen. The same remarks have made a8 to the continuanve Of insauity from Marcu, 1867, yo the making of ue will in Juouary, 1868, apply, with eqnal, if not greater force, to the period irom thus time to the date Gl the codicil; after which the decedent soon ex- hibited Violent symptume again, aud dnauy settled into senile dementia, Wich continued until ber death, early in 1872, With unquestion- wble inganity in 1806. Which continued through that I ye ana sill existed in Marcu, 1867, it rested on proponents to show, which thoy | nos satisfactorily done, that the decedent had covered irom that state in January, 1808, when the will was executed, containing the bequesis which bad their origin wheu she was undoubtedly in- sane; aud it ugain vecame the province of tne propupenis, aud in which also they have tallied, to show (hat when the coalell was consummated tn July, 1869, she had a0 recovered as to be capable of a testamentary act; which instrament was not @ Dew Will in Substance, DUL Was only intended to render the provisious of the will itself more certain in their operation in favor of the societies, ‘The proponents have attempted to overcome tue presumption of coutinued insauity as io each paper; but, Woile tuese presumptions were tue stronger irom the advanced age uf the de and 1rom the suort period of time sin of acknowledged ur undoubted insanity 10 March, 1867, the preponderance Oo; positive testimony in we case {8 greally in suppors of the presumption that the mental derangement continued from tne year 1806 to hier decease. 1 consider that tne evi wence of tue liy witmesges on that subjec properly wei, 31 us to their comparative oppor: unites of kuuwiedge aad means of judging of the rationality vi acts estitied to by them, Was ingul- Ucieut to show that at the time of the execution Of either the will or tue codicil the decedent had recovered irom her previous insamity, aod toiuk thas t bi of that Glass Of Vewtimony 14 against stamentary Capacity at that tine; Out in such cases ag the preseut medicul wituesses are o! the gre orvance, ald the proofs furnish tue © of eVeral AUCH eXperts, Which, taken in connection ‘With the (eativiony of the other witnesses, cloury eutabiisi: ‘omy mind, that when tu ce executed ooth the Will ana the coriol still laboring under the original mental d ment; that ber insanity Would at that time Maaiiested itwelf to those present Hf eMcient tes or experiments bad been tried, tu con’ it that the will and and otner iarth an posouud mind, aud i , were Loth tue offspring of hat the insavity of decedent continued until yt Teacher the stage Of seule dementia, In which lie terminated, A decree will, therefore, be entered rejectin; the papers propounded as not itied to ad aye’ piovgte, ana That she degedeut died jate: a JUDGE ROOSEVELT’S WILL. | ‘The late Judge James I. Roosevelt lett an estate Worth about $2,000,000, most ot which ke gave by will in equal sbares to his three children, Fred- erick, Charles Y, aud Marcia, with remainder to their children, and, im case Of the death of either without issue, bis or her share to the survivors for Ife, In the will was the folluwing clause:— ‘lL authorize and empower my executors, should they deem 1s judicious and proper, to make ad- vances, In their diseretion, to each of my ebildren, respectively, out of the capital of ‘his or her share, fron time to time, and in such | amounts as May seem sale and conducive to the true interests ef the benediciaries.”” Hach Of the children, under this clause, applied to Theodore and James Roosevelt, executors, ior an advance of $100,000. ‘The executors thought some inconsistency between vis and clause of the will, and, for a settiement of the mat- ter, an action was brought in the Supreme Court Wo obtain @ judicial determmation as to the con- struction of the will, In this action the devisees are plaintias and the executors and infant chil- dren of Charles Y. Roosevelt defendants. ihe case Was argued yesterday veiore Jucge Westoroek, holding the Supreme Court Special Term. At the close of tre argument the Court took the papers, reserving its decision. THE NEW INDICTMENTS AGAINST TWEED SUSTAINED. The particuiars ef the two new indictments found against William M, Tweed, the one charging bim wita conspiracy, the other witn mise pretences, have already been given in tne HERALD, a8 also the argument made before Judge brady on a mo- ton Co quash tuem. Judge Brady gave, yesterday, his decision in the case, denying the motion. Tue grounds of his decision will be found in bis written opinion, given juily below :— ‘the indictment aesignaved A, December 15, 1871, in the taouiar statement, was superseded by iudictment of February 20, 1873, desigmated ta Lhat statement as iourteen. This 18 conceded. It 18 also Conceded that it is included in the “omni- bus” or “vig tnulctment,’”? so calied trom the num- ver of 1t8 counts and consequent puik. ‘tne m- dictment Gesignacea M, October 17, 1872, was Superseded by indictment of February 20, 1873, designated by the number fiiteen, ‘fois 18 con- ceved, 1b is also Couceded that fifteen ts incluued in the omnibus indictmeni, These mdictmenis contain charges, tt would seem, under what is called the Mock Auction act. It is also conceded, ay I understand 11, that the indictment designated Y, June 16, 1575, 18 also included iu the omnibas indictment, 1 accept tuese concessions and acting upon them drew the legal conclusion that tney Ought to be abandoned, but! do not under- Stahd 10 to be the practice of tue criminal courts to auticipate In thao way the plea of a previous conviction or trial the old plea of autre iois con- vict, Ihe defendant 1s jett to thatdefence, The Court cun suxgest that Ut the concession mean that tue subject of any of tue indictments was presented tor consideration on @ lormer trial aud judgment awarded upon it the defendant ought not to be again put in jeopardy. it is wn Uunecessary Waste Of the public ume and Rrovonsn an unnecessary expense, When an in- jotment ls superseded by one subsequently found belore trial the motion to quash is proper. Aiter @ trial the plea meutioued ts tue course pre! by the rule and 1¢ a perect answer if sus: ‘Teese Oservations in reiation to the plea apply to all the Other inaictwents for misdemeanors not admitted to have been the subject o1 a previous trial li the maiter embraced nave been before tried and disposed o1 in any Ways. AS to these, how- ever, and indeed as tu ali those Jor misdemeanor, J understand tne defendant’s counsel to maintain taac the delendant having been already punished for a viojation of his duty in respect to certain warrants and as auditor, cannot in reference to any of the warrants alleged to have been preseuted to or to have been before him, even tuougd not included in the emuibus in- dictment, be ugain punisued; that there was bat one crime, and that there can be but one pun ment, ‘fb18 proposition, which was argued in the Ovurt of Appeals in Tue People ex rel, ‘weed Vv Liscomb, but uot passed upon, cannot be ente! tuiued on A motion to quash. It neither relates to the form uor the substance of the indictment, aud if regarded as an extraneous act, which may be presenied on amMaavits, it must be said that it is tue subject of a plea of a former conviction and not of a motion to quash, As I understana the snodject, these modes of proceeding are entirely distinct and different, One involves a trial and the other does not, itis further claimed by the defendaav’s counsel that the indictments ound in June, 1875, shouid be qu: d, because Not pre- sented wituin three years aiter the alleged ol- tence, aud because tho Legisiature could not en- large the ume for fladin, imaictments trom three to live years in respect to previous offences, No case decluratory of such a dvctrine was relerred to, and I thing none can be found. If the enlarge- ment tvok place alter the expiration of the three years, there is, peruaps, little dovrt that sucn jegislatioa wouid be delective; but in reference to the offences charged, it appears that the lume was eXtended during the running of the statute. ‘I'he subject was then entirely Willin the control of the Legisiature and its action 4g not exposed to the objection thatit was in vio- iatiou Of any coustitutiona: pronibition. It is also said by the deiendant’s counsel that the tudict- ments for misdemeanor and lorgery in the third degree and relatiog to the asserted claims of Mewride, Davidson & Co, and OU. D, Boller & Uo, ar Jor the same matter aud snould be qua: This proposition is based upon the provisions ot the Revised Statuies that “if there be at any time pending uxzuiust the same defendant two indict. ments for the same offence or two indictments Jor the sume matter, although cnarged us different offences, the indictment first jound shah Le deemed to be super- seded by 8 indictment and snail be quashed,’? (: .. 750 and 402.) The charge ol uegiect of duty is a misdemeanor, and exposes the olfeuder to punishment only by fine and imprisonment in the County Jail. The charge of felony may be punished by imprisonment in tue State Prison, Neglect of duty may luvolve to some extent the sume matter embraced within the charge O! lorgery, but not necessarily 80. The Warrant resulving trom a neglect of duty to uudit m.ght ve :orged 10 some respec! ‘ne warrant wou.d relate to the suoject muti ot the neglect, but tne prov! would not necessarily tnvoive it, ‘Tne existence of the warrant as a legal lustrument and the proof o! the act of ior- gery would preseut the chic: features of the crime, in adaition to that, however, it must be said that the charge is lorgery in the third de- gree ugall ti jendant, or that he was acces- sory belore the fact; that ue counselled and ad- vised (he act oi iorgery. 1t appears, tuerefore, that those indictments are not jor tae same ol- fence or lor the same matter. it seems to be doubtful even whether the sprosecucing attorney would be compelled to elect which of tuem he should try. lt musc¢ be borne in mind that a te- tiun to quash an todictment mvolves a legal ais- creion, wud that when ine question is douvtiul Ibe defenuantis put to his motion 10 arrest of Judgment. When the appiication is made on the part oO: Loe deiendant the cour 8 almost uutiormly refuse to quash an indicument where it appears 10 be fur Some eROrmous crime, sucn as treason, fel- ony, 1orgery, perjury or subornatiou. ‘tuey have also retused to quash for cheats (Barbour’s Crim. ‘dreatise, 349, and cuses cited; Bisuop on Crimiaal Procedure, vol. 1, 268, ana cases vited; 1 Cultty’s Criminal Law, 300 and 303), and geoerally the rule May be stuted to be thus the rignt aud duty to quash should be cicar and free irom doupt, (bisa0p supra and cases cited.) Tne only remaining tn- diccment 18 that designated X on the tubular statement. 1O (nls presentment tho defendani’s counsel ubjects thut it avers ao oficial certificate by tae delendaat Without setting itiorth, ‘the reference to autnorities to sustain tus objection is # citation of cases Whion relate to the crime of forgery, the rules appertaining to which are neces gurily More strict tuan to the charge of obtaining money, &, by fase preten because tne paper iorged is toe gravawen of the charge, and must be stated in order tnat the Court may see that it is an instrament of which the crime may be predicated. In tne in: dictment the charge is that the Major's siguature was optalned Ly ialecly represenung u bill of items to be Correct and true, und this charge might be sustained without the written vertigcate at- vacbed LO the vill us alieged. By the Revised Stataces the offence 1s complote woen the signa- ture 1s obtained 7 a jalse tence with Intent to deiraud. (fhe People vs. 4 13 Wi $20.) ‘Toe rule of pleading requires the preten to be stated in detail (3 Chitty’s Cr. Luw, Hd, 1819-426, ‘end,, 182; the r tue Peop.e vs, Stoue, 9 Gates, supra), aud Lo be negatived, bat not u sarily all of them, If the pleader upom atl averred as necessary 0: proof, he must allege auu iogative ail (Cases supra.) ive indictments must contain ull the material facta and circumsiances which tue public prosecutor will ve bound to prove to proguce # conviction, [tf musi show upon its Ixce that tue offence charged bus been committed ; or, eld, ‘it must be io the ee of Lord Ma AD Inteligenot story, $0 eXplucit as to support it- self,’ (Barbour's J., 1di.) 1t does not Neem to be necessary to set vut any of the contrivances or pretences (hat were tn print or in writing, out to state what they were or purported to be. Toe pleaver does iu this indictment state what the certifate pucporied to be—numely, the oficial approval and certificate oi tne bill. Feaee and © weed, a8 Comm the meauing &.ems to ane. ieee Le 4 bot eO.rely satiated a eu i# ree irom Ovjecti certiticate la to be reved Ft'ot the case {does not in tor tue 7 OF woud falta ine certificate of tue approval contained iv Aud dues Dot yet out its contents except by wa, of conclusion. form @f au indie! toy sty for laise pr by color vl w aise and counter- yout 16 Aud other tokens states What is men. Honed in the letcer, which w: aise and which te tuo oliel incident Of tie offence, Without setting out tie letter—see 3d vol. Unirty, Pi, (dy 18, 19) 431, In the mdictment ander Conside tue fajse pr @ 13 inat the bil Was correct, ‘Tn appro’ Offi¢iaily is Colluterai to the charge jess the plvader means to rely upon it as aD fa: inyreuient the offence, Assuming a doubt toe: thi vero; lelony, it ts crim e proper, in accord with the rule stated, Ww ueny We Moilon tu quash that inwictment, waion will be dome. ‘ihe urder to be entered must de in ace cordance with tacse views. i huve not deemed it Reaesaary ta de more Vo state my concin. TEW YORK HERALD, SATURDAY, JULY 3, 1875.—TRIPLE SHEET. sions upon this motion. If I have the inclination to be more elaborate other mat'ers equally press- ing Would prevent it. lt is sufficient, nowever, that it is unnecessary. THE INDICTMENTS AGAINST CLAF- LIN & CO. All the members of the firm of H. B. Clatin & Co. who were indicted for alleged complicity in | the silk smuggling operations of Lawrence, bes Anges and others, bave, with the exception of | Messrs. Eames and Fairchild, through their coun- sel, entered pleas of not guilty. Messrs. Hames and Fairchild were absentfrom the country when | the pleas were entered, but Mr. Hames has since | returped and given ball jor trial, Mr. Fairchiid ts not expected back until the fall, Yesterday Mr. Willtam M. Evarts, senior counsel tor the drm, had @ confereuce with United States Districs At terney Bliss im relation to tne disposition of the cases, the result of which was that they will prob- ably stand for trial until bext ial) unless suoner disposed of by some motion made by deiendants’ counsel in the meantime. THE CASE OF CHARLES L. LAW- RENCE. In the correspondence which took place between Mr. E. W. Stougnton, senior counsel for Charles L, Lawrence, the extradited slik smuggler, and United States District Atvorney Bliss with tne Solicitor General in relation to the terms on which Lawrence was extradited, Mr. Steugnton asserted that Minister Schenck had agreed that Lawrence should be tried in this country on the charge on which he was indicted sud no other. District Attorney Bliss contended that no such agreement was made, To settle the question, the Solicitor General telegraphed to General Schenck, and receive followiug reply, whicn he sent to Mr. Bliss :— y pretence that I agreed that Law- rence, if extradited, snould be tMled on but one charge is without a shadow of trath.’”? DECISIONS. SUPREME COURT—CHAMBERS. By Judge Brady. Mann vs. Willourpby.—Opinion, Stadtmilier vs. Joansen.—Order granted, by Judge Donowue, Wright va. Wright.—Motion denied. Wulp vs. Rogers and another.—Order granted, By Judge Davis, In the matter of Pacistly.—Pursuant to the Beares, of the petitioner it is referred to Hun. aniel P, Ingraham to taxe proof aud report, with his opinion, whetuer any, and woat part, if any, ofthe prayer of said petitioner should be granted, and whether @ bookkeeper shoald be employed, and at what compecsation, and whac allowance, 11 any, should be wade to the danguter ana other relatives of the sald lunatic, and What allowance shouid be made to the petitioner on this applica. tion. Asie! vs. Reynold.—There must be a reference to woke Breet o1 the tact alleged in the petition. Re- ferred te Mr. Jono V, B. Lewis for the purpose. Order to be prepared. SUPREME COURT—SPECIAL TERM, By Judge Donohue, Borland va. Riker et al.—Findings and decree signed, COMMON PLEAS—SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Larremore. Fitzsimmons ys, Fitgpatrick.—Plaiotig® has leave to amend. Canlon vs, Liddy et al.—Motion denied. New York Life lusurance Company vs. Dean,— lication granted. ennessey vs, Frank.—Injunction issued, Batley va. Keep.—Security must be equal to the claim, By Juage Loew. Gages vs. Quigley.—See memorandum for counsel Merioru vs. Wexel.—As the counsel have failea to submit all the papers to me, ag it was under- stood the; uld, so the metion must be demed, With leave to renew, MARINE COURT—CHAMBERS, By Judge Joachimsen, Bretano vs. Burgess; Muiler vs. Rampo; Rogers vs. Lees Kurtz vs. Trech.—Defendants’ deiaults noted. Faim vs. Keenan.—Motion denied; no costs. Gildersleeve vs. Dixon.—Judgment on remit- tance granted, Philips vs. The New York Watch Company.— Dismissed unless terms are complied with, Mclotyre vs. Ing; McLougolio vs. The Mayor, &c.; Wortuley vs. Archer.—Orders of reference grantea. Underndorter vs. Taybolt ; Inch vs, Goldsmith,— Proceedings dismissed, with costs. Leach vs. Wiliams; Keetz va. Shuuman,—Motions to open defaults grabted on terms. The People ex rel. v8. Ferguson.—Motion graated 4 | uient | last two years, and even up rei St coasidervation, and with intent to take the benefit o! the Bankrupt law, which he did very soon alier these transactions, ana procured bis discharge, At that time he was indebted to John A. Winston & Co. in the sum ot $10,000 or $12,000, for which judgment nad been obtained against alm, and his only purpose was to evade the payment of tis devc. ‘The bill further alleges that said Benjamia Glover, the bankrupt, and said Elepora Glover and Nathanic! T. Giover and Hugn Weir kept secret their said fraud acts, aud endeavored to — concea them trom tae knowlejgo oO: the assignee and 0) tue said Jonn A. Winston & Co,, whereby tues were prevented from obtaluing apy suilicient knowledge or information thereof until within the to the present time they have not peen able to obtarm full and particu- lar information as to the fraudulent disposition Made by said Benjamin of # large part of nis prop- erty, This dill Was fled January 20, 1873, the com- plainant was appointea assignee December 1, | 1809, and the bankrupt received his discharge April 11, 187% W. Jones, surviving partner of John A. Winston & Co., im December, 1871, filed a petition in the Distriet Court against ‘ne bankrupt in order to have mis disemarge set aside jor the fraud, but belore process could be served on Glover be died. These are the material allegations of the bul, and, if true, the waols scheme was & gross fraud, concealed by the de- fendants from the knowledge of the assigmee and | rom Winston &Co., against whom the \d was perpetrated. Italso shows that this suit was brought three years and @ few weeks alter te complainant became vested with the rights of an assignee in bankruptcy im the case, r. Justice Miller delivered THE OPINION OF THE COURT. ‘The policy of the Bankrupt law 18 speedy a3 well as equal distribution of the bavkrupt’s assets among bis creditors, and the one is almost as im- portant as the other. Hence the ciause limiting the commencement Of actions by and against tho assignee to two years after the rigut of actiog accrues applies to all judicial coniests betweeu the assignee and any person Whose interest 13 ad- verse to his, Bat though this clause in terms 1u- cludes all suits at law or tn equity, we are 0) opinion that the general principle applies hers that where the action ts intended to ovtaia fo- dress against afraud concealed by the party ur which jrom its nature remains secret, the bar does not vegin to rum until the traad 18 dis covered, Ana We think this doctrine 13 equaily applicable on principle and authority to suits ot 1aW as well ag in equity. Reversed, TURKEY. ecltchilie dect ana FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES OF THE SULTAN'S GOVERNMENT—RAILWAY WORKS STOPPED—A4 STRIKE AT THE ARSENAL—AN EX-GRAND VIZTRR SERIOUSLY ILL, CONSTANTINOPLE, June 11, 1875. ‘The imperial Oitoman government again shows alarming symptoms of a relapse into its old mala- dy—an empty treasury, The inability of tne Porte to meet some of its financial engagements has oc casioned this week two important strikes—one ia the imperial arsenal and the other on the works of the Shumla Ratiway, in Roumelia, Some iew weeks back the Construction Company of the railway line, finding ic impossible to induce the government to pay the amounts due to them on the last six monthly certificates, suspended their works, alter having auty given notice to the gov: ernment, upon which, promises being cneapel in Turkey than cash, the government sent earnest assurances vo tue directors of tne Shumla works that the money woula be forthcoming at once, and desired them om no account to persevere in their regulation, ANOTHER TRIAL. Work was accordingly resumed and for another month the constructors waited in hope ful expectation, until, convinced of the delusive nature of Turkish promises, they at length deti- nitely stopped the works, and thus another delay is occasioned in bringing the Turkish lines into junction with the European network of railways. AT THE ARSENALS. As regards the strike at the arsenal it is worthy of note and worthy of Turkish maddie that willie the government cannot flud money to pay the poor artisans employed in the imperial arsenals, the number of those useless toys anchored im front of the Sultan’s palaces 18 constantly being imcreased, At this moment no less than four irons clads are on the stocks in England in various by detault. Bell vs, Hasard.—Piainti® may have ten days’ time to make case, &c, Reiser vs, Cut—Defendant will be let im on terms, Lippman vs. Kreling.—Motion granted on pay- ment Of $10 cosis, &r. Deveraux vs. The Mayor. &c,—The appeals can- not oe dismissed at Special Term, urns vs. zier,—Delenaant may award on payment of co: &e, MARINE COURT—GENERAL TERM. By Chief Justice Shea and Judges Gross and Acker. ‘Simon vs, Breitstein.—Tnae order appealed irom je arirmed, with $10 costs to respondent. TOMBS POLICE COURT. Before Judge Otterbourg. SPECULATING IN £PECTACLES, Yesterday aiternoon a young man, giving his name as Henry O’Brien, residing at No, 22 Bond street, and @ mative of Massachusetts, called at the store of D: and asked the clerk, Jonn O, Hogg, ifa tleman, with side whiskers, had been ther clerk replied to the query in a somewhat indefinite way Mr, O’Brien lounged about for aiew moments though waiting for his ex- ected iriead, Presently he left rather hurriediy. r. Gilman, who Mad just began to suspect the stranger's movements, followed him and, calling a policemen, ed his arr On his person were found filteen gold and jour silver spectacles, which Mr. Giiman identified as his property, Justice Ovterbourg held oim in default of $1,000 bail to answer, DISORDERLY HOUSES. Ernest Wagner and Albers Scnaf, of West Broadway, were held to answer for keeping dis- orderiy houses, WASHINGTON PLACE POLICE COURT. Before Judge Wandell. ALLEGED FELONIOUS ASSAULT. Thomas Wilson, @ boy about fliteen years of age, was arraigned on @ charge of felonious assault and battery on a Portuguese boy named Alfonso Gensago, Gensago was standing on the stoop of No, 14 Carmine street on Thursday vight d was Strack in the by @ large sized bullet from a p! he Detectives Slevin and Henderson, of the Fit- tac ove’ ° a" count lor the pistol that had bi seasion, Juage Wandell oner to await the reault of ALLEGED DURGLARY. Sarah White, of No, 206 Eighth avenue, was the Complainant against ayoung man named Henry Westphall, whom she accused of burgiariously enteriug her premises early yesterday morning and stealing thereirom mone: jewelry value of $3L, I'he prisoner. who wi OMcer Kelly, of the Sixteenth pre mitted in $1,000 ball to ws ESSEX MARKET POLICE COURT. Before Judge Smith. THE OLD sToRY. On Wednesday night Charles Strauss, of No, 0 Roosevelt street, in search of pieasure, entered the house No, ¢@ Allen street. He there met two young ladies, named Agnes Bentley and Annie Bodell. Agnes particularly jtascimated Strauss, and he accompanied to her apartments, Where he went to sleep. About four hours aiterward he awoke and sought hia pocketoook containing $186, but coud not flod it, He calied an officer of the Tenth oe and had Agnes Bentiey arrested, He mith yesterday held her io $1,000 bal to answer aod committed Strauss aud Anna Bodell to the House of Detention as wit- nesses, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. WASHINGTON, July 2, 1875, The toliowing opiaion nas been delivered in the Supreme Court of the United States t= No. 225, Joun F, Balle: of Benjamin baal @ vankrapt, appellant, va. Hugh Weir, Dathaniel B. Glover anu Lienora Gio e1,—Appeal jrom the Cireult Court for the southern distiict af A ‘Chis Was @ bili in chancery, brougut by id Gilman, No. 58 Nassau street, | stages of progress, as well as one frigate ana two transports in the native building yards of lswidt and Sinope. 1t might possibly be censidered only moderately wicked on His Majesty’s part to in dulge his fancy tor such expensive additions to a fleet whose only dutyis to maintaim the cordon drawn around His Majesty’s palaces on the Bos- phoras, to the great annoyance of the dally pae- sengers between Stamboul and the Upper Bus- phorus, whose time 1s considerably wasted in the detour which tne boats are obliged to make, and to the greatiy increased risk attending the navi gation of the chamnel narrowed by this cordon to leas than half its available width, if everything else Was Smooth, and arrears Of pay in the army aod tue arsenal were as things of the past, But @ mgre serious condemnativa must be passed on sucll extravagance when it 1s known thut the men ewployed in the arsenals have been | KEPT OUT OF THEIR WAGES | Jor six months, ull at las: they grew hungry and savage, and to taelr clamors one monta’s wages were doled out, @ mere drop in tue ocean, aud utterly insufMicient to fli the Dumervus gaps. Lt Was soon gone, and now they aave got hungry and Savage ugain and they have ceased to work. ‘Their demands are not unreasonable:—“We are too hangry to work,’ they Say; ‘give us bread and we shall have strength to work again, NEARING THE PALACE. ‘This cry goes up at scarcely half an hour's die tance from His dixjesty’s residence at Dolona Bagtché, and tne imperial despos, living in hi Maxuificent isolation. his ears comfortably scopped by his surrounding parasiies, and prova- bly has no ether thought in bis mind, wken be- boiding his iron-clads, than that it pehoves a mighty Sovereign like himself to possess a lew more, aod that his Grand Vizier is not worto Ropping in bis pace if he Canmot find tue means vo pay lor them, A GOVERNMENL MAGNATE SERIOUSLY ILL, ‘rhe late Grand Vizier, Hussein Aral, who was lavely appointed Governor of the Vilayet of Smyrna, 1s, it is leared, in very precarious health. He has been obliged to resiza bis post aud to pro- ceed to Europe tor medieal treatment. The ex- Minister of Mariue, Achmet Kaiserly Pacha, takes nis place at Smyrna, dud ag be is DO’ much ofa scholar—that is to say,can neither read nor write— he may probably take a less serious view than nia predecessor of the enormity vommitted by the Missionaries in introducing books printed in America in the Turkish language, with a view of proselytising the “true believers. CURIOSITIES FROM CRETR, The Imperial Museum bas been lately enriched ps ae iule-size statues of Roman 5 aiscovered in Cre’ eventeen Or eighteen years, 18 intended ior her daughter Claudia. A legible inscription on toe pedestal places this et bepona duubs. young princess did not really outlive the mature age of our months, but was alter her death raiseu by On imperial edict to the rank of a divinity, and Was bouored with altars and temples. These od- jects of anuque sculpture are chiefly interesting ga illustrating the state of moral decadence into Which the art ud fallen in toe days of this moai wicked of Ro! emperors, RIGHT PRRSUNS DROWNED. A termpbie avcident hus takea place, causing the FS avh of eight mobers of Turkish ge A r wv Lak @ family of tweive fm og embarked in Oa the in order to be p: the wedding festi ak resen ities of u friend’s dauguter, wo lived on tne o; posite coast. The passage was salely accom: plished im the morning, and nothing occurred Guring the day to loreshadow the terrible doow in waiting or some ol the party. The day wat spent in feasting, singing ana dancing, and to: ward eveuing tne gu leparted, hoping to re. sume the merry making at some day not iar d t They Lien ‘cely passed the middie af § ors, aged, the boat Wus capaizi and its numan freight were struggling water, The On shore saw the acctuent put off to tI but they had some distauce to row, and ume they revched cae spor to 1our on) WelVe COU Assistance be of any ‘The others, chiefly young giris, uaable to Straggle against tho waves, Mad sunk to rise no more, CORONERS’ CASES. Ann Mitcneil, @ native of Ireland. aged sevonty> eight years, residing at No. 12 Wes: stroot, died yesterday alteraoon from the elfects of barns received by her clothing taking Gre from 4 guudle, The Coroner was notified, jamin Glover, & bankra adwient and void com: te by tho bankrupt murrer to compiainunt’s use the sult Was Dot fe irom the appuintment i@ taken from ' a ng the bi by U vn ‘oult Court was right, ihe Dill Makes @ ver: ‘ creditor of ‘he mode of property, of wnion the bunkrapt po amount beyond Wwiat was necessary to pay ¢ debts, to Hugh Weir, his her-in-law; juthaniel Glover, his and i on, bis Wil Toese conveyances wo Early yesterday morning George R. Holioway, employed inthe batn at the Battery, found ine body of a mal infaa Mt three days old, Soar ing in the river. It was sent to the Morgue. At hali-past ten o'clock yesterduy morning Odicer Uraig, of the Fourth prectuet. founa the body of wknown man foaing the East iver, nD pier No, 27, He was five fees six inches in height, Of lignt complexion, witn dark hair and whiskers, And wus dresyod th ® Calica shirt, Dla pansaloons and galtor shoes, ihe Coroner wii hod aa inquest. Mary Donovan, a id jourt montis old, parents live at No, 216 Nast Puty-ainen was drownea by a tally taliag luty @ ly Miied wWasitub yesterday alieraovn, having leit her aloue, Tho Ovroner wae