To the public
..^ •A. 5°^ ■*^^* -o^ '^^t' V "<!>. ♦•««' .«^ ^^'\ s'- -^^ A^ ^'k%f/K' %. .c** .'^IK'. ti. A* ^^^^a:-- ' » ^ rn h\ ^...'^SL^rr'y^J a. TOCHMAN. %^<^ TO THE PUBLIC, Two pamphlets, one a petition addressed to Congress, and the other purporting to be an expose of my conduct, lately pubhshed by a person named Gaspard Tochman, are thought, by some of my friends, of sufficient importance to deserve the following reply. A few days delay have occurred in procuring certain statements, and proofs necessarj^ to a full understand- ing of this subject, since I was able to procure copies of these papers, which was not till the 21st instant; as, although I wrote to Baltimore for them, and my friends there have informed me they mailed them for me, not one has yet been received by me from that city. In the year 1842, I was applied to by Mr. Ignatius Chutkowskito represent him as one of the claimants of the Kosciusko estate. He soon discovered he had no claim. In the year 1843, he obtained from the Estko branch of the heirs a power of attorney to represent them, and an agree- ment for compensation. He then desired to retain me as their counsel. This was at once declined, because I very well understood that their inter- ests were confided to the Russian Minister, by whom they had been com- mitted to the charge of Messrs. Fendall and Smith. In the fall of 1845, I was applied to by Gaspard Tochman to move his admission to the bar of the Circuit Court, and did so. He had previously desired to retain me as counsel for the Estkos, from whom he represented himself as having a full power of attorney. This turns out now to be the same power Mr. Chut- kowski had obtained, as I have stated, in 1843. I declined, because I con- sidered it unprofessional in any manner to interfere with a case in the charge of professional gentlemen, my friends, Messrs. Fendall and Smith, being still in charge of it. He then, without my knowledge, applied to Mr. Bodisco, in a letter, dated 23d November, 1845, referring him to a letter from Mrs. Estko to Mr. Bodisco, dated 6th April, 1844, requesting him to retain me as counsel. [See No. 1.] A few days after this, I was invited by Mr. Fendall to an interview, which resulted in my being definitively engaged to take the place of Mr. Smith, who had withdrawn, as will more fully appear by Mr. Fendall's letter, No. 2, with the distinct understanding betv/een him, myself, and Toch- man, that he (Tochman) could not be recognised by Mr. Bodisco as counsel, but that we would consider him as such. The first step to be taken was to give security for costs, and this led to our agreement with him. (See No. 3.) The next was a bill to suspend the execution of a decree which had been passed by the Circuit Court, ordering the payment of a large sum of money, part of the said estate, to Mr. Kosciusko Armstrong; and a petition also was prepared and filed in the Orphan's Court, which we deemed a primary and important movement. These things being done, we were surprised by an editorial notice, which appeared in the National Intelligencer, and gave this individual a prominent position in the direction of the cause, and which also is appended hereto, marked No. 4. On the 9th of January, 1846, Mr. Fendall gave me the information stated i& my note to Tochman of that date, and requested me to communicate with Tochman. I did so, and with his knowledge and advice wrote the letter marked No. 5. This was shortly afterwards answered by Tochman in person. We had a conference, at which he at first appeared to be great- ly excited, claimed the right to the papers, and complained of Mr. Bodis^ go's assumption of authority, as he called it. I sympathized with him quite sincerely, succeeded in soothing him, and, as I supposed, in satisfying his judgment, for it is certain that he assented to the plan proposed in that letter. The letters of attorney were prepared by Mr. Fendall; one of them was read over to Tochman by me, and he, from that time tillJanuary, 1847, acquiesced in them. His letter of the 12th March, (published by him,) surprised me, but I considered it an ebuLition of passion which would soon pass away, or that he feit himself in a stronger position then, and relied on my sympathy with him, and hoped by that means to induce me to unite with him in some course different from that we had adopted. We continued to correspond till the fall of that year, when he came to Washington, and was almost daily in my office, having access to my books, papers, and any thing he wanted; and not ajar, or word of unkindness, occurred between us till about the month of December last. He then undertook to act inde- pendently of us, and, against our objections and remonstrances, filed a bill, quia timet, against the administrator of the estate, and without my know- ledge signed my name to it. I felt dissatisfied, and spoke to him freely, but calmly and gently. The next morning I found in my office the letter from him marked No. 6. We still proceeded harmoniously together, and on the fourteenth of January, 1847, I received the note marked No. 7, relating to business in the Orphan's Court. On the 18th of January, 1847, I was engaged in an upper room in my office, and on coming down stairs I found him at my desk writing the fragment No. 8. My entrance interrupted his writing, and we continued the subject by con- versation, which ended with our agreeing to meet again on the morning after the morrow of that day. Up to this time he was acting towards me, and professing to feel for me, the warmest regard, respect, and esteem as a friend; and I had not then had the slightest reason to doubt it. Is it not, then, almost incredible that he had then written and sent to Mr. Bodisco the letter of the 18th January, 1847, now published by him? Yet such was, I believe, the fact. Surely, very little more is necessary to show his character. Add to this, that I had opened my house to him, introduced him to my family and friends, felt and exhibited the warmest and most active sympathy for him as a Pole and exiled patriot — all of which my friends well know. To proceed, however: that letter of the 18th January, 1847, was immediately forwarded by Mr. Bodisco to Mr. Fendall. Before we could see Mr. Bodisco, and obtain his leave to use it, Tochman, on the morning of the Slst came to my office, smiling, and, to all appearance, as friendly as ever. I told him I was engaged, and immediately walked out, (See No. 9,) and went to Mr. Fendall's office, where he followed me, and endeavored to enter into conversation with us. We received him and treat- ed him with the utmost coolness, but he persisted, till Mr. Bodisco was an- nounced in Mr. Fendall's dwelling. Mr. F. went in to see him, returned immediately, and invited me to walk in. I then asked Tochman to remain till I had seen Mr. Bodisco, as I might after that have something to say to him. He declined this, and went away. We obtained Mr. Bodisco's authority to use the letter of the 18th January, and then addressed to Toch- man the letter he has published, marked K; his reply, marked L, and our rejoinder M, as published by him, followed in order. This tei;*ninated our connexion with him. It is not my purpose to reply to the letter of the 18th January, 1847. I leave the public to judge of the weight his evidence should have against Mr. Fendall's and Mr. Smith's letters and my character. It will be seen that I was not, as he has asserted, employed by him. I w^as invited to come into the causes by Mr. Fendall, (Mr. Fendall acting under the authority of Mr. Bodisco,) and Mr. Bodisco, in addition to his gen- eral charge, had been specially requested by Mrs. K. Estko to retain me, by her letter of the 6-18th of April, 1844, an extract from which is annexed, marked No. 1; that the agreement between Mr. Fendall, Tochman, and my- self, was made in good faith; that Tochman then understood he could not be recognised by the Russian Minister as counsel, because of his relation to the Russian Government, but that this consideration did not prevent our private association with him ; that he knew that all the important proofs in the cause had been placed in Mr. Fendall's hands by the Russian Minister, who had a right to reclaim them; that, with this full knowledge and understanding, he caused a publication to be made, which placed him before the public in a prominent position as counsel, and might embarrass the Minister with his Government; that he was advised of the effect which this publication had produced, and of the means by which it could be obviated ; that he distinctly assented to, and acquiesced in these means ; that for more than a year he continued his association with us, until he thought '^the pear was ripe," as appears by his letter to Mr. Bodisco; that during all this time he did not pretend to, or exhibit, any suspicion or want of confidence in us; but, on the contrary, almost to the last moment professed, towards myself at least, the utmost respect and confidence ; and finally, while keeping up this shew, wrote to Mr. Bodisco a letter containing the most injurious, calumnious, and unfounded accusations against us ; concluding with an "overture" (?) to the same person whom he had been denouncing to the President, and whom he now seeks to vilify and traduce. And here, before I proceed further, let me state distinctly and explicitly, that so far as my knowledge, information, or belief, enables me to speak, Mr. Bodisco has never in any manner attempted to control, direct, or ad- vise our action. He has always expressed a lively interest in, and been ready and prompt, as far as was in his power, to aid in the advancement of the claims and pretensions of the heirs of General Kosciusko to the proper- ty and estates w^hich he left in this country. But so far as my knowledge or information extends, he has not directly or indirectly interfered in any manner withthe proceedings in the courts, or the management of the causes, except in the single instance, when, upon the application of Mr. Fendall and myself, he addressed his letter to the Judge of the Orphan's Court. It is true, a statement was made by one of the letter writers for a New York paper, to the effect that Mr. Bodisco had endeavored to cause the arrest of this man Tochman; but the author of that letter, who I understand derived his information from Tochman himself, was afterwards fully satisfied of the falsity of that accusation, it is also due to Mr. Bodisco to state, that he has uniformly deported himself in this matter not only with the courtesy which distinguishes him in society, and the judgment, discretion, and dig- nity which becomes his office, but with the kindUest feelings, and the most apparent anxiety to advance the interests of the subjects of that country which he has so long represented near our own Government. As to the libel on the court, contairi'ed particularly in '' The Petition," it is not necessary to say a word. Shortly after the letter written by Mr. Fendall and myself to Col. Brent, [and published by Tochman, letter N,] Tochman endeavored in the Orphan's Court, to take the direction of the affairs into his own hands. Mr. Fendall and I resisted him successfully, and in the course of the tri- al much passed to produce excitement. After the Court had adjourned, Mr. Fendall and I remained in the room in conversation, and Tochman approached, and attempted more than once to mingle in it. At last, I calmly requested him to allow us to confer alone, adding, that we had already written to him to desire that all intercourse between us should cease. He wished to know why I could not speak with him. I replied, if I did, I feared I should give him offence, and if I did not, he seemed dis- posed to take offence. He then said, as I thought menacingly, why can't you speak with me ? Up to this moment I was entirely cool, and had carefully avoided giving him any offence. I was irritated by this, and re- plied, ^' because I do not think you a gentleman.'^ He retorted with much heat, ''■ I am as much a gentleman as yourself;" and I rejoined, ''I do not bandy epithets with a blackguard; I have told you I did not con- sider you a gentleman, and that is enough." He then passed in front of me to the door of the court room, which was a few paces off, and said something about my writing letters. I will not be positive about his words, for I was greatly irritated, and I advanced a step and said: " stop, if you say that I have written a word that is not strictly true, you are a liar, and a scoundrel," and pausing a moment, looking at him, I added, ^'and I fear you are a coward." He made no reply ; nor from that time forth, for more than nine months, did he take notice of it. (See No. 11.) In the Circuit Court in the spring, I believe in the month of April, he was so personally offensive and insulting to me, that some of the members of the bar called my attention to it. I then said aloud in his hearing, in substance, ''that I had long ago used to him such terms of opprobrium, as no gentleman would submit to, and I had nothing further to say to him." See No. 12. At the last term of the Circuit Court, Mr. Fendall and I moved the court for leave to file a bill, in the nature of a hill of review, in behalf of Capt. Wankowicz. It was a matter with which Tochman had nothing to do; but, if successful, must be greatly for the benefit of our contested clients, the Estkos. It was resisted on the ground, among others, that, in a former proceeding in the same cause, [the biU of review which had been filed while Tochman was associated wdth us, and which had been dismissed on a demurrer, the same bill Avhich was dravmby me,] we had used the name of Capt. Wankowicz as one of the heirs of Kosciusko. Capt. Wankowicz had made an affidavit that he knew nothing of that proceeding, and had not authorized or employed any counsel to appear for him. This was un- doubtedly true. The case was argued on the 2d Nov., and I admitted that we had appeared under a mistake of the extent of our authority; and I ar- gued that, as we believed it necessary to use the name of all the heirs in that proceeding, and he was one, we thought, in order to protect the inte- rests of those we represented, we had a right to use his name. That we had certainly acted in good faith, and a Court of Equity would -not, in a case of a clear mistake of authority, hold Wankowicz responsible for the acts of the counsel. To my very great surprise, I was repeatedly inter- rupted by Tochman, w^ho affirmed tiiat he had acted in that matter under an '■Hmplied pov)er of attorney ^^"^ [this produced a laugh;] and, among other things, he said he would not sit still and bear such insults. The court in vain tried to keep him in order; but I did not reply or retort, or otherwise notice it. At last I had gone to another ground. Mr. Coxe had argued that, even in cases where the attorney had fraudulently appeared, the Court w^ould hold the party bound by his acts. In reply to this, I had begun to com- ment on a case cited by him, and to shew that they were cases at law. I stopped and said, it is not necessary, however, to press this matter, for no such charge is made here; and F presumed the Court could not imagine there was any ground for it. At this time I was suddenly interrupted by Tochman. The accounts, given by eye and ear witnesses of this transaction, are hereto appended. [See A to E, and statements of Messrs. Fendall and Smith.] On the 15th Nov., I received a letter, requiring me to retract and apol- ogize. This led, ultimately, to his sending me a challenge, which, of course, I declined. So far I have studiously avoided the use of any epithets not necessary to a full understanding of this narrative; my object being to present facts by which the public can judge what right this man had to expect any fur- ther notice from me. If his object is notoriety, I hope the proof I have furnishet^ will gratify his fullest desire. It may be asked why I did not accept the proposition of a reference of the matter in dispute. There were two very good reasons; the first, that he had positively denied what so many persons knew to be a fact — that he had charged me with fraud; and there was no room to refer that question; and besides, his whole conduct, from his first letter to Mr. Bodisco, 18th January, 1847, to this time, had been so inexcusably bad, that I greatly doubted whether I could get a friend who, knowing the facts, would have undertaken the commission. And second, on conferring with calm, con- siderate, and judicious friends, they thought there was another sufficient reason, which it is not necessary to notice. The letters and statements which I have appended hereto, giving accounts of these various personal matters, are in reply to letters and requests made by me; the pubhcation of which would only swell these pages to a most unreasonable size. JOS. H. BRADLEY. Decembe)' 22dy 1847. [No. 1.] C'est poar la seconde fois qaej'ose prendre la Hberte d'importune votre Excellence, en invoquant I'appui de sa haute protection concernant la succession qui nous «st echueala mortdu General Kosciusko. * ^ * * Nous supplions tres humblement votre Excellence de vouloir bien autoriser a la defense de notre cause Messieurs Coxe* et Bradley, qui seuls possedent notre confiance. Nous esperames que les papiers envoyes en 1825 par la volonte de feu notre aaguste monarque I'Empereur Alexandre seraient suffisanta, mais comme les Americains exigeai- ent plus de formalites, nous fumes obliges de rechef a les assembler, et remettre a la Depu- tation genealogique, ce qui ne contribua pas peu au delai, vu que nos avocats ne vous en informerent des long-temps. Je mets tout mon espoir en ce que, votre Excellence daignera condescendre avec bonte a. mon humble demands, et suis avec le plus profond respect de Votre Excellence, (Signed) La tres humble servante, G— 18 Avril, 1844. K. ESTKO. Siech-nowieze. *Memo. Mr. Coxe was retained on the other side. — J. H. B. [No. 2.]. Washington, February 23, 1847. Madam : Some recent proceedings, affecting the interests in this country of the heirs of the late General Kosciusko, induce me to make to you the following statement: Some time after the death of the late Mr. Swann, I was invited, by Mr. Thomas Swann, jr., one of his sons and executors, with the consent of the Russian Minister, Mr. Bodisco to succeed the deceased, Mr Swann, as one of the counsel for the heirs of General Kos- ciusko, in prosecuting their claim to the fund left by him in the hands of the late President Jefferson. The negotiation, after being apparently concluded, was ultimately broken off by the refusal of the heirs of Mr. Swann, (who looked to the contingency of success in re- covering the fund for the remuneration of the services he had rendered,) to provide, or to contribute to providing, any means for defraying the costs and charges of litigation. The papers whichM r. Swann, jr., had handed to me for examination, I was requested to re- turn to the Russian Minister, from whom they had, as he stated, been received. Mr. Bodisco declared himself to be without authority to make any provision for expenses, but promised to communicate with the heirs on that subject, as well as on the subject of com- pensation for the services asked of me. I stated to him that I should, of course, prefer the compensation to be in the usual mode of a retainer, but, this being understood to be in- convenient, if not impracticable, that I would consent to engage for a compensation con- tingent on the result, if the rate of it were first fixed. These two points, a provision for the current expenses of the contest, including the costs of court, costs of collecting testi- mony, cost of translations, &c., and the fixing of the rate of compensation, I insisted on, as preliminary to any absolute and positive engagement on my part. I had several interviews on the subject with Mr. Bodisco, who always manifested the most friendly solicitude for your interests, and v/hose position, knowledge of business, and energy, have enabled him to render to you most essential aid. At one of the interviews referred to, I suggested to him the association with me of Mr. Bayard Smith, the probable labor of the case being such as to require more than one counsel, under any circumstances; and it being likely, moreover, that official duties, with which i was then charged, might require my presence in another court, at times when some action on the part of tlie coun- sel for the heirs might be wanted. Mr. Bodisco, knowing, as well as myself, the merit, professional and personal, of Mr. Smith, readily adopted the suggestion. Mr. Smith con- curred in my views as to the two preliminary points. Mr. Bodisco answered as before. We expressly disclaimed any definitive engagement as general counsel in the case, till those points should be adjusted ; but agreed to attend to one part of it, which was then pressing. Had you sufficiently known or considered this f;xct, you would not, I presume, madam, have lent a willing ear to some complaints which have been made to you. Mr. Smith and myself thought that when we consented to undertake an old, complex, and troublesome case, which might last for years, for a compensation contingent on an event which might never happen, we consented to all thattlie libei-aliiy of counsel could be expected to grant, or the delicacy of clients to accept. We considered it as utterly out of the question, in addition to all this, that we should assume any pecuniary responsibihty, to say nothing of other objections to carrying on the suits at our own expense. And, on the head of expenses, I would mention, that in our courts the agency of several officers, among whom is the clerk, is necessary in the conduct of a suit; that the remuneration of these officers is made, not by a salary from the Government, but in the form of fees paid by the parties in each particular case; and that the clerk is not obliged by law to render any ser- vices to absjnt plaintiffs, which they do not secure the payment of. This is usually done, either by some resident citizen becoming gecurity, or by depositing a fund with counsel for that purpose. It w^as the payment of these fees, and the other occasional expenses in- cident to such a controversy, for which we desired the heirs to make provision. And in so desiring, 1 cannot see that we deserved the imputation of being " interested persons," in a derogatory sense of the term, any more than a stranger in Europe would do, who should decline expending his money for some purpose of ours in that country, without being in- demnified. This condition proceeded undoubtedly from a proper regard to our own inter- ests, but I am at a loss to see how it implied any neglect of yours. At all events it loas a condition, and one uniformly adhered to by Mr. Smith, with the exception before indi- cated, and by myself, until the occurrence of events about fifteen months ago, which will presently be noticed. The exception referred to was the claim of Klimkiewicz, which while we were awaiting a communication from your family, assumed an alarming aspect. His pretensions were sus- tained by testimony apparently strong. We were without legal evidence to substan- tiate your claim, the papers sent being informal and not such as we had called for, and even if they had been furnished according to instructions, they would not have been availing without an answer to Klimkiewicz's bill. An answer was prepared by Mr. Smith, and sent to Poland through the Russian legation, in order to be signed, authenticated, and re- turned to us. But it never came back, though we repeatedljr urged upon the heirs, through the same medium, the pressing necessity of our having this document and the proofs, in order to prevent a decree in favor of Klimkiewicz. This was, however, fought off from time to time, until at length that individual died, and the suit abated. It has not been re- vived. In the fall of 1845 a stranger called on me, introducing himself as Major Tochman, and as the writer of a letter which I had before received, stating that he was employed to co- operate with me as assistant counsel in prosecuting the claims of the next of kin of Gene- ral Kosciusko. Being particularly engaged at the time, and desiring to confer with Mr. Smith before going into details with a person of whom I knew nothing, I requested him to call again. Before he did so, I had seen Mr. Smith, who agreed with me, that as our whole authority in the case wes received from Mr. Bodisco, it was proper that he should be consulted on the subject of Mr. Tochman's proposition ; and I accordingly so informed Mr. Tochman on his next visit. When I stated to Mr. Bodisco the application which had been made by Mr. Tochman, Mr. Bodisco answered, that the interest of the claimants had been confided to his charge, as the representative, in this country, of the Russian gov- ernment, and in consequence of their earnest appeals to the Emperor for his interposition ; that the political relations, which he minutely explained, of Mr. Tochman to the Russian government, were such as to make it wholly impossible for its minister to recognise him as counsel or agent in a case under its superintendence; but that he had no objection to any private arrangement which Mr. Smith and myself might think proper to make with Mr. Tochman ; and indeed thought that such an arrangement might be expedient, inas- much as Mr. Tochman's knowledge of the Polish language mi^^ht render him useful as a translator. At my next interview with Mr. Tochman, I conimunicated to him these views of the minister, and took especial pains to impress on his mind the propriety, and indeed necessity, in the event of any agreement with him, of avoiding any step which might, in Mr. Eodisco's judgment, tend to compromise that minister. On this occasion some conversation ensued as to the details of the case. I explained to him the circum- stances and the extent of my professional connexion with it; my desire that, before that connexion should be made absolute, some understanding should be had as to the rate of compensation for the services of counsel, and especially that some provision should be made for actual expenses. On this latter point I felt the more free to insist, because, in the course of his remarks, he stated that one of the claimants was in independent, perhaps wealthy, circumstances. Mr. Tochman adverted, with an appearance of dissatisfaction, to a statement which he had heard, that Mr. Smith, my associate in the case, was a relation of Col. Bomford, the administrator. I waived my objection on that head, and conferred with Mr. Bodisco, who cordially sanctioned the association of Mr. Bradley. On the 28th or 29th of November, 1845, Mr. Bradley, Mr. Tochman, and myself, entered into a written agreement to give the necessary security, and to go on with the case conjointly; the compensation to be left for future ad- justment with the heirs, but fixed as between the parties to the agreement. Within a few days afterwards, a paragraph appeared in the National Intelligencer ostentatiously an- nouncing Mr. Tochman's professional connexion with the case — a publication doubtless made at his instance, and in utter disregard of the caution I had so earnestly endeavored to impress on his mind, as being essential to the interests of the heirs. The publication excited, as was to have been expected, the displeasure of Mr. Bodisco. He', required either that we should prepare a power of attorney to myself and Mr. Bradley alone, or that an early day should be appointed for the return of the papers which had been placed in my hands. This proceeding was made known by Mr, Bradley to Mr. Tochman, with a distinct assui*ance that, if the proposed power should be executed, it would not be used in prejudice of the agreement of November, but that, on the contrary, it was the fixed purpose of both Mr. Bradley and myself to carry out that agreement in good faith ; the pov-j-er being, so far as we were concerned, wanted only to meet the diffi- culties of Mr. Bodisco, and to avert ill consequences. The provision in it for compensa- ting counsel, Mr. Tochman would have had the full benefit of under our agreement. — Though at first manifesting high displeasure at this suggestion, he repeatedly after- wards expressed his acquiescence in it. Two powers of attorney were sent to Mr. Bodisco on the 23d of January, 1846 — one to be executed by the Estko, and the other by the Zulkowski branch of the clainaants. The case being started by the engagement of Mr. Bradley and myself to become responsible for expenses, has since been prosecuted with all possible despatch. On examining the proceedings had while it was under the care of the former counsel, Mr. Bradley suggested a course of action in some respects different from that of the original counsel, and for reasons which commanded my cordial assent. He took the leading part in carrying out the plan which iie proposed. Being of opinion that additional security from the administrator was necessary, and the existing law not meeting the exigency, he prepared an amendment to the law, procured for it the recommendation of the Grand Jury, submitted it to the proper committee of Congress, and it was enacted into a law. Under that law was prepared a petition to the Orphan's court ; and that tribu- nal required the administrator to give additional security in the amount of 1120,000, which was done. This was not satisfactory to us. Mr. Bradley afterwards prepared a petition for further security, founded, in part, on information given by Mr. Tochman, which he failed to make good by proof. The petition was dismissed ; and we reserved the right of appealing from the order dismissing it, to the circuit court. On the very day of the dis- missal, one of Col. Bomford's counsel mformed me that the course of Mr. Tochman to Col. B. had been personally so wantonly injurious and offensive as to determine Col. B. and his counsel to resist his proceedings ; but believing that Mr. Bradley and myself were influenced purely by a sense of professional duty in our acts, and that we were sincere in the opinion we had expressed that the administrator ought to give additional security, Col. Bomford's counsel would recommend him to give it in such amount as Mr. Bradley and I thought necessary, in advance of the compulsory proceedings which we meditated. " I was pleased at the suggestion, because, if acted on, it would avoid the delays which the law enabled the administrator to oppose to such proceedings, and the expense and trouble inci- dent to them. On conferring together, Mr. Bradley and I thought |40,000, additional to the |20,000 already given, would be sufficient. This opinion was promptly communicated to Mr. Tochman, who cordially concurred in it. Col. Bomford was informed, through his counsel, of our assent to the proposed arrangement. It was finally agreed on; the bond was prepared ; and the filing of it was delayed only till a deed of trust for the benefit of the sureties could be completed. To all these facts Mr. Tochman was privy. He even knew who the sureties were, and expressed entire satisfaction with them. In this state of things a notion, which he had before conceived, that a proceeding in chancery, called a bill quia timet, was the right course, again took possession of his mind. Mr. Bradley and myself opposed the measure, as well on the ground of its inherent unfitness for effect- ing the object in view, and of its probable failure under our local law, as of its tendency to prevent the consummation of the arrangement already made for effecting that same object. He nevertheless persisted in filing the bill ; and though in a letter of his, which will pre- sently be noticed, he admits that both the counsel associated with him were adverse to the measure, and indeed relies on that fact as enhancing his own particular merit, he took upon himself to sign the name of one of them, Mr. Bradley, to it. The effect of this crude and reckless experiment was very nearly to defeat the arrangement already agreed on for the bond — Bomford and his counsel feeling indignant at the movement as a breach of faith. This evil, however, was averted, and the bond was filed. The omission of the heirs to take the steps necessary for the defence, of their interests, had enabled Kosciusko Armstrong to advance his claim to a legacy, under the will of 1806, to the stage of getting a decree for the payment of the money. In the conferences of counsel, after the agreement of November, 1845, the cases of the Estkos vs. Lear, and Armstrong vs. Lear, printed in the reports of the Supreme Court of the United States, were examined and considered ; in which cases are noticed two subsequent wills of Gen- eral Kosciusko. Copies of these wills were filed as exhibits by Klimkiewicz. and Mr. Bradley so informed Mr. Tochman, and, indeed, showed them to him. In order to arrest the proceedings in Armstrong's case, it was determined to file a bill of review, which was 10 accordingly prepared by Mr. Bradley, and filed. Thus the execution of the decree in that case was suspended. Mr. Bradley prepared an elaborate petition to the Orphan's Court, praying leave to contest in that Court the will of 1806. The application was resisted by the opposite party ; the Orphan's Court decided in our favor ; an appeal was taken to the Circuit Court, which was there most ably and elaborately argued by Mr. Bradley. Mr. Tochman was not at that time in this city, and, had he been here, could not have rendered the slightest service. The Circuit Court decided in our favor ; the preliminary question and the case went back to the Orphan's Court. We there availed ourselves of a particu- lar provision in our local testamentary law, to request an issue to be sent to the Circuit Court, to enable us to obtain proof of the execution of the will made in 1816, at Soleur, in Switzerland. Under precise instructions from Mr. Bradley, Mr. Tochman wrote to a correspondent in Paris to get an exemplification of that will. The document was received, and offered for record in the Orphan's Court. Mr. Tochman having failed to follow- strictly his instructions, some further proof was necessary, which he was instructed how- to obtain here, and did obtain. In the farther progress of the Armstrong case, it was necessary to file an answer to the bill. This was prepared by me, handed to Mr. Tochman for revision, and by him re- turned to rac, copied. The copy was filed, and the original is still in my possession. While your case was at the stage in its progress to which the foregoing outline brings it, Mr. Tochman addressed a letter to Mr. Bodisco on the 18th of January last, which he followed up by another, dated on the 22d of that month. So soon as Mr. Bradley and myself had authority to use the letter of 18tli January, we addressed a note to Mr. Tochman, apprizing him that we could not henceforth have any further intercourse with him. Annexed to this communication are copies of those letters.* The outline just given, and of which Mr. Bradley will confirm the accuracy, so far as it relates to the pe- riod of time since Mr. Tochman's connexion with the case, will enable you to determine how far the author of such letters is entitled to your confidence. They are a tissue of misstatements, in the various forms of direct untruths, deceptive suppressions, and false colorings. Of his pretence, so boldly put forward, that " under his control," and through " his exertions only," " the right of the heirs is already established to the whole fund," your own intelligence will at once enable you to see the gross improbability. Though the right of the heirs is, I regret to say, not yet fully established, something has been done towards that end ; but the proceedings already had were under provisions of local laws, with which it would be no disparagement to a foreign advocate of even a high grade, to suppose him less familiar than counsel are, whose daily business it has long been to act under those laws. The fact is, that his ignorance of our laws, and his pertinacity, not- withstanding, in pressing his own conceptions, have all along greatly impaired the utility of his zeal. So far as the records of the Orphan's Court and the Circuit Court can be ap- pealed to as evidence, they falsify the claim v/hich vanity, or a deeper motive, has induced him to assert. Most of the papers prepared by counsel are in Mr. Bradley's hand- ■w^riting. The only two of any length or moment in Mr. Tochman's, were one of which he was the mere copyist, and another which he filed against our remonstrances — a pro- ceeding certainly useless, and which very nearly became mischievous. The officers of both the Courts would be ready to testify that his share in the oral proceedings before them was equally insignificant. From what I have before said, you will be able to appre- ciate his claim to having obtained an amendment of our testamentary law ; to the discov- ery of the will of 1816; to his having forced from the administrator the $40,000 bond, &c., &c.,&c. Equally unfounded is his story of having secured i|5,800 by injunction. He was, indeed, very anxious to apply for an injunction, and it was with difficulty that he was dissuaded from it. We so far yielded to his urgency as to concur with him in giving a notice to the bank, believing that no harm would arise from th-e measure. In his letter of 18th January, he says: '• Had Messrs. Swann and Sampson, and, after their death, Messrs. Fendall and Smith, done their duty, had they not pei-mitted Mr. Bomford to col- lect the moneys of the estate, and to speculate therewith ; we could recover now the whole fund, without any further litigation." It is difficult to determine whether ignorance or falsehood predominates in this passage. The law not only gives the administrator full power to collect assets, but makes it his duty to do so ; if he does not apply them to the payment of debts, or invest them, the Court will charge him with interest; he has the con- trol of them till distribution, and the remedy of the distributees is on the bond. Though I know nothing of Col. Bomford's alleged speculations, and Mr. Tochman has never fur- nished a particle of proof on that subject ; yet, as I have before stated, so soon as counsel were definitively engaged in the case, the necessary steps were taken to make the security *These letters having been published by Tochman, I have not thought it necessary to annex them. J. H. B. ample. But, even if the counsel denounced by Mr. Tochman had acted differently, what pretence is there for his declaration that the money could then be recovered without fur- ther litigation r The will of 1816 is recorded ; but the Courts have yet to decide on the legal effect of the revoking clause in it, and on various other questions arising out of the (several testamentary papers. 