MADAME LYNCH IN THIS COURT OF SESSION.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 5, 25 February 1871, Page 4

MADAME LYNCH IN THIS COURT OF SESSION.

Two actions at the instance of Madame Lynch, a party in the celebrated Paraguayan trial of last year, are entered in the Court of Session rolls. The first action is against William Stewart, M.D., and the second is against Dr Stewart and his brother, Mr George D. Stewart. The cases are likely to excite considerable interest, as they are connected with the trial which took place last winter, when, it will be remembered; Dr Stewart was a party to the Paraguayan bill of

exchange. Madame Lynch seeks to recover from Dr Stewart the sum of £14,455. The pursuer maintains that she in 1868 placed in the hands of the defender a quantity of specie, consisting of 4400 ounces of coined gold, patacons; and that the defender undertook to transmit it to this country, to lodge the proceeds in the Royal Bank in his own name, and hold it for the pursuer’s behoof. • The specie realised £15,465 4s sd, and the pursuer has raised a summons against the defender for the amount stated, as being her share of the proceeds. She further alleges that after the specie was shipped it was arranged with the defender that £I,OOO of that sum should be applied in payment of the bill of exchange to which we have .

alluded, in favor of Mr Gelot, of Paris. The second action is against Mr George D. Stewart, Buenos Ayres, and his brother, Dr W. Stewart and concludes for £23,963 12s 6d, in payment of a large quantitity of yerba or Paraguyan tea, lor which a promissory note was granted and endorsed by the defenders. The pursuer alleges that it was arranged that the amount stated should be paid over to her after the proceeds of the yerba were realised. At the Court of Probate, London, as already announced, on Monday afternoon, an application was made that Mde Lynch, the mistress of the deceased Marshal Lopez, should be allowed to administer to * copy of his will made in his favor, the original of which was alleged to have been destroyed at the taking of Paraguay. The case was adjourned for proof of the proper execution of the will, —“ Review/’