elaborate argument upon any matter, however grave or momentous. In a
cause in which he was employed as associate counsel with General
Hamilton, an incident occurred, in relation to Chief Justice Yates,
not unworthy recording. It speaks a language that cannot he
misunderstood, and is demonstrative of the influence which he had over
the feelings as well as the minds of his hearers. It was the
celebrated case of Le Guen vs. Gouverneur and Kemble, one of the most
important, in regard to the legal questions and amount of property
involved, which at that day had been brought before our tribunals, and
in which case he completely triumphed. Only a short period previous to
his decease Colonel Burr remarked, that on this occasion he had
acquired more money and more reputation as a lawyer than on any other
during his long practice at the bar. A letter was addressed to Thurlow
Weed, Esq., requesting him to apply to the Hon. John Van Ness Yates,
son of the late chief justice, and ascertain whether the incident, as
reported, was founded on fact. To that letter Mr. Weed received the
following answer.



JOHN VAN NESS YATES TO THURLOW WEED.

Albany, July 8th, 1837.

DEAR SIR,

After some difficulty in finding my father's notes of the argument in
the case of Le Guen vs. Gouverneur and Kemble, I have ascertained that
the account you showed me, given in the letter of M. L. Davis, Esq.,
is in the main correct. My father's notes of General Hamilton's