Garesche is in the midst of a severe trial where the loss of which will result in persecution of his client by her enemies. She is a practical Catholic, however. Garesche's wife is the widow of Francis J. Carnes whose will left to her his whole estate with the exception of $1000 a year. By the terms of the will the estate will go to her children upon her death. She appointed as trustee none of her own family, but Edward A. Weeks, the person to whose children the estate would go if Garesche's wife should die childless. Weeks, the brother-in-law of Carnes, tried to make Mrs. Garesche promise to name his cousin as trustee in event of his death, but she refused. Weeks died last November, and the first they knew of it was when proceedings were begun to name a trustee in his place. Then Weeks' son wrote of his death but mentioned nothing of the proceedings. They wished to rush the suit through without interference. The referee in the proceedings showed himself to be a gentleman who suspected something because the case was not instituted by Weeks and Forester, but only by Forester. They attempted to secure the appointment of John Wilds, partner of Forester, and positively contrary to Mrs. Garesche's wishes. Failing in this they tried to substitute the U.S. Trust Co., but Garesche's lack of confidence in corporations made him hesitate. He holds that his wife has the power of appointment, but a doubt is expressed whether this is the law in New York. He named James A. Slevin, who with his father and Eugene Kelly ? can post bond of at least $3,000,000 or more, as his choice for the trustee appointment. He and his wife want the judge to decide the question soon so that they can collect some of the revenue that has accured. Weeks was even on hand with his bond when court opened, attempting to push through the appointment. Mrs. Garesche chose Slevin because she did not want one of either her own or Week's family. The plaintiff claiming an interest in the will has no status in court since the will was to become reoperative only if Mrs. Garesche should die leaving no children. Since she already has children that precludes that idea; the only question is whether Garesche meant those children by him or by a later husband. Carnes knew he could have no children, but this cannot be proven in court. :: I-1-o A.L.S. 8pp. 12mo.