The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, March 20, 1896, Page 11

MUST PROBATE THE PENCIL WILL, The Document of Later Date Will Be Considered First. A CHANGE IN THE CASE. Proponents of the Stolen Will Receive a Sudden Set- Back. D. M. DELMAS’ SOLITARY FIGHT. Proceedings Under the First Will Stopped and a Vital Point Gained. Attorney D. M. Delmas sent his voice echoing through Judge Slack’s courtroom }\-uh no uncertain sound yesterday morn- ing, and succeeded in giving a new turn to | 'THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, FRIDAY, MARCH 20, 1896. 1 paper, or it might be composed of many vn-' })ers. The testamentary disposition might be ragmentary, one part found in adocument executed at one time, one part found in a doc- Lment executed at another time, and one part found in & document still further on. You ‘Would take all these documents together, whatever was presented or had the appear- ance and form of & testamentary disposition, piecing them together, if necessary; giving them one by the other,’if necessary, and from the whole mass presented you would deter- mine what was the will of the decedent. There can be no question upon that point. AsIstated in my argument before, it is not possible, in the nsture of rational jurispru- dence, that because the holder of one paper which is testamentary in its character shall with indecent haste’ present itselfi to the Clerk’s office one moment after the testator has expired, that be therefore acquires & pare- moufit right in court over the man who, with greater decency, has waited until at least the ashes are cold before he has acted. What would your Honor do, or what would counsel do, sup- pose & man had held both of these wills in his possession, and not knowing which was in oint of law the last will had come into court, ad filed s joint petition asking for the probate of both or either, &s the court might determine? , What would Your Honor de if the petitioners for the will of the 24th had been e?unuy eager and prompt with the petitioners of the will of the 21st, and had entered the Clerk’s office simultaneously; and had simul- taneously filed their petition? What would youdo then? Why, you would simply say, which is the most convenient way? And what islaw but the ministerof ‘conveniencs? I have stated here in the argument which I made before upon the contest filed by Dr. Lev- ingston 1o the will of ‘the 21st—that is, the formal grounds of contest to that will—that I did not deem such a mode of procedure neces- sary or evan proper, but your Honor had indi- cated in an opinion filed here on tne 5th of May that that was the mode of procedure. Out of deference to your Honor's opinion I en- deavored to follow it. Your Honor aetermined that the coutestants had, under the law, no legal right to contest, and therefore disposed of that matter without passing even inci- dentally upon the proper mode of procedure. But that contestant, or at least that person who sought to file that formal contest, has in this case side by side with the petition of the children of the decedent his own petition for the probate of this will. You will hear that at some time. When? If he had filed that peti- tion first—if he had been at the Clerk’s office on the morning after the testator’s death and been admitted to probate early in January of last year, nobody at that time dreaming, I sup- posé, that there was any later will; supposing the will of the 24th bad been subsequently discovered, what would the parties claiming under that will have had to do? They woul have brought that will into court and they would have asked for its probate. 1f shybody objected to the probate, afier due notice, they would have come in and filea their contest of that will, together with the application for the probate of the later will; there would have been a prayor that the probate of the for. mer will revoked. What would your Honor have done in the method of procedure at that point? The holders of the probate of the will of the 21st, would have come into court and would have said to your Honor, probably, “Does not the statute say that when probate 15 granted of a will, it is conclusive against the whole world until set aside? There- fore, you cannot set up a later will until you have set aside the probate of the former will.” To that would have been replied, “But the in- strument by which we propose to set aside the probate of the former will is, itself, a will, which has no validity until itis probated. And if you say we must first set aside your probate, before we can probate our will, and then say that we can’t attack your probate until we have probated our wiil, you are whirling us in a vicious circle without beginning or end.” The courts of New York bave solved that dif- ficulty in a very simple way, for whenever in those courts—and I cited to your Honor the authorities — whenever in those courts the later will is offered for probate, which pur- ports to revoke a former will which has been probated, if the court believes in the good faith of the application it enters an order in its minutes, an order nisi setting aside the pro- bate of, the former will, conditioned that if vrobate be granted to the later will the rule or the order hecomes absolute, but if probate be denied fo the later will then the ruleor the | order expires at that point, and the former probate is revived. 1 especially call your Honor's attention in this matter to the authorities in New York, and to the very case that was cited in response o the contention that the first petition should be dropped from the calendar, which {s a case in the one hundred and seventeenth Indiana, I think, and the case of Vance vs. Upson, which 1s in the Texas Reports—in the sixty-fourth, if 1 mistake not. This Whetton matter, if your Honor please, I suppose you are familiar with. That case, in the matter of the estate of Whet- ton, is found at dpage 203, Ninety-eighth Cali- fornia, and I read from page 204 the o%inion of Mr. Justice Garoutte, concurred in by Mr. the orderly method of procedure, as_suggested in thet case, is to enter an order, as Mr. Delmeas says, in order nisi, which is virtually.revokin, what I have already done, conditionally, ol course, upon the application of the will of later date being successiul. These conclusions do not in any way inter- fere with the proposition advanced by Mr. Pierson a moment ago that Dr. Marc Lev- ingston is not entitled to be heard upon the application to admit to probate the will of the 21st. He is not a party to that proceeding, and is not entitied to bring forward any evi. dence in regard to the validity of that will. But he is entitled -tohave a hearing upon the will which he propounds which has been con- tested ; and it seems to me, for the reason that Ihave given, that the onldv El’nper method of procedure is to_hear and determine that ap- plication. If the application is suc- cessful, then the of the 2lst is out of the way, it falls; it the application is unsuccessful, this court will proceed immediately, I take it, to hear the ap- plication of the will of September 21. And upon that proceedin®, as the court is presently advised, Dr. Marc Levingston, and no one else who has not contested or filed a proper con- i;es“é, the will of the 21st,is entitled to be eard. 2 The evidence has already been introduced. Isuppose no further evidence will be intro- duced to support the will of the 21stof Sep- tember. 1 will simply continue the matter until the issues as to the will of September 24 have been determined by this court. Ex-Judge Paterson at the opening of the afternoon session requested that the stenographic report of tlie murning’s pro- ceedings be read to him, as he had been called out of court before the decision was rendered and did not wish to make any move in the case until after he had learned what haa been dome. His request was granted, and, having heard the reading of the report, he offered to submit his de- murrer to the probate of the will of Sep- tember 24 without argument. To this Mr. Delmas replied that with the demurrers interposed by the children to the “contests to their petition he had nothing t0 do, but there was no'demurrer to the contest to the petition of Dr. Levingston. The doctor, he continued, had answered the contest and had de- manded a jury trial of the issues thus joined. MR. DELMAS MAKING HIS SUCCESSFUL ARGUMENT. [From a skétch made by a *“Call” artist] BE WARY OF THESE TWO The Man in-Hard Luck and the Man Whose Brother Needs a Lawyer. | A WIFE!'S NUMEROUS DEATHS. Six Starving' Children as a Plea for Alms—A Railroad Accident and the Dollar. The Associated Charities, that make it their business to investigate and list all cases of want brought to their attention, complain of an imposter who is going about the City with a pitiful tale of his re- cently deceased wife and bis starving little ones. Many times during the last three years the mythical -poor wife has died to order and the motherless waifs have continued to cling persistently to life after being re- peatedly at death’s door, with a stereo- typed starvation staring into their pinched and emaciated little faces. But the soli- citous father has persistently struggled on under his burden of sorrow, varying his story, his name and his address as he has appealed to the sympathies of different benevolently inclined individuals. Sometimes he is Ward, sometimes he is Martin, sometimes he is Wilson, but under whatever name he poses he shuns chari- table societies in a nice esthetic way that shows a disposition not to make any sys- tematic orfianization & party to his per- sonal troubles. Speaking of the case yesterday Mrs. A. ‘W. Flint, the registrar of the Associated Charities, 601 Commercial street, said: “‘He is a perfect fraud and his long con- tinued operations would seem to_indicate that he has been successful in imposing upon private persons. 'He takes good care to avoid us and our investigations, but from time to time we have had ,occasion to look him up, as people have called our attention to him as a fit subject for aid. a4 “Once I remember he applied to Miss Culbertson at the Chinese Mission, and she telephoned to us. Every address he gave when followed up has been found to be fictitious. About two years ago he went to Millen Griffiths and stated that he had a son at the Fourth and Townsend station, a consumptive, whom he had brought that far but Lad no money to remove Lim and care for his critical case. The society’s man went down there, but found no evi- dence of any such sick man. “Again’'we heard of him as living at 615 Sixth street, in Scott & McCord’s hay barns, with his'six little children; his wife had just been buried. He has told his story to Mrs. A. N. Drown, to tbhe Society of Christian Work, to Mrs. Darville Libbe of the Second Unitarian Church, and to several persons that I do not recall. “He told Mrs, O. W. Briggs that his wife had just died and that he and his four . S | the rather winding course of thingsin the| Fair will case. A number of roufine matters took up | the attention of the court during the early | part of the morning session, and it was after 11 o'clock before Judge Slack was | able to take up the case in which so many millions are involved. At the invitation of the court Mr. Delmas first proceeded to | state his position. He said in substance: The matter for discussion this morning isas | to the method of procedure, namely, whether the will Tepresented here by Messrs. Pierson | and McEnerney, i€ entitled to be-probated ex | parte, or whether in view of the fact that there | is pending an application and s petition for the probate of & will purporting to be of later | date, the two proceedings must be heard to- | getherand both be disposed of before & judg- | ment or order is entered. I anderstand thatto | be the condition of the discussion. The court—I think thatis correct. The pro- ponents of the will of September 21 insist upoa going on, and Lyunderstand your position is that you have tfe right of way. | Mr. Delmas—There is a petition filed on the | 18th of March, 1895, by the three children of | the decedent asking for the probate of the will | which I shall denominate the will of the 24th. | There is also a petition filed on the 25th of | Mareh, 5, by Marc Levingston, one of the | executors named in the will of the 24th. To | the petition of the children asking for the pro- bate of the will of the 24th a contest was filed by certain minors represented by Judge Pater- #on, and to that contest a demurrer has been intérposed by the children, on the ground that as to Herman Oelrichs Jr. the provisions of the will which would give him a standing in court, ‘which is the trust clause, so-called, of the will of the 21st, are null, and therejore he takes | nothing, and has no standing to contest the | will of the 24th. To the petition of Marc Lev- | ingston & contest has been interposed by the same minors, and to that contest an answer has been filed. Certain-other parties, legatees represented by Mr. Percy, have also filed a con- test to the petition or to the will presented by the petition of Mare Levingston, and to that contest a demurrer hae been interposed, which demurrer has been sustained and time given to amend. The time to amend, or file an amended contest or take such other action as may be deemed prcper, hes been extended, as I understand, and expires to-day. ‘Your Honor has stated in the remarks which were made here, 83 Teported to me, this whole matter very succinctly—placed that whole ques- tion really in a nutsnell. I refer to page 53 of these notes, where your Honor is reported to have eaid: “It may be necessary, after all, to roceed with the will of the 24th, and if that | s sustained of course the will of the 2lst shonld not. be admitted to probate. On the | other hand, if the will of the 24th is found to | be invalid for the reasons urged in the contest i to that will, then the will of the 21st might have to be taken up for probate.” That, if your Honor please, is exactly the condition of the law and the rule of procedure as we understand 1t. The will of the 21st was presented some time in December, 1894, or in the beginning of January, 1895. That will was offered for probate by the four executors and trustees named in it. Matters remainedin statu quo so far as taking any steps toward the probate are concerned until the 18th of March, when the will of the 24th was offered for probate by the three children of the dece- dent. On the 25th of March the probate was agein petitionea for by Marc Levingston, one of the executors named in that will. Now, not long after that the gelmonen for the probate of the will of the 21st urged that will forward and demanded action to be taken upon it, claiming that they had a right 2o bo, heard. they being first in point of time in eourt, That was opposed by the children, the petitioners of the willof the 24th, and they then meade & motion to drop the petition and the proceedings inaugurated therebv for the robate of the will of the 21st;and there,as1 umbly submit and conceive the first wrong step was taken in these matters. It was not rigg! to ask to have a petition, which was properly before the court asking for probate of & will, whieh was ciaimed to be the last will to be dropped from the calander, because that petition was the thing which gave this court jurisdiction of the Falr estate. That was the fountain of all subsequent power ana of sll subsequent duties to be Jischarged by this court, Whoever came in after that petition, but came in in answer to the citation which had been issued to the whole world, this being a proceeding. in rem, to come forward and either affirmatively ap- prove of the proceedings sought to be inaugu- rated by the petition or to oppose it; and whoever came in aiter that citation presenting enything which could show that the facts stated in that pelition were rot true would come in Tesponse to the summons of the court, submitting himself to the original jurisdic- tion inaugurated and set in motion by the original petition. Now, when that petition was filed vour Honor acquired jurisdiction of the estate of the decedent, ‘with power to hear and deter- mine all questions incident to its administra- tion. In the first piace, was the decedent roally & decedent—was James G. Fair dead ? You had a right to inquire and be informed of thet fact; that was the first step in the line of orderly procedure. If you solved that ques- tion in the afirmative the next question was, did he die testate .or intestate ? You solved that question one way or the other, and if you determined that he died testate the next ques- tion was, mot merely, Is this paper which is now presented his' will, but wh f8 his will? Whai is his will? Any- body had & right to corae in and be heard upon thai inquiry. If he left 8 will—which you de- termined by the fact that he died testate—the next question was, What is his will? What is it composed of 7 It might be composed of one presented that will or that petition—would he be entitled to be heard without these parties bo claim and have proclaimed here wi h me emphesis that that will is a forgery? Would they not be entitied to be heard upon that subject, they claiming under a will which, though earlier in point of time, would be the last will if the other o what they de- clared it to be—spurious? Beyond all question thet must be so. And, as I say, it is not possi- ble that by merely being first in the Cierk’s office the parties did acquire a right of way over everybody else, and that their pmceod’- ings must culminate and go to an end, although they have cited the world to appear and show cause why their I‘mceeding or their will should not be probated. We are contéstants nere of thewill of the 21st, because in_that paper which we filed we aflirmed that this is not the last will, that the will of the 24th is the last will. We are thus afirming contradictory propositions, each con- testing the other's position. They are con- testants of our will. We are contestants of theirs. In the report of the estate of Horace Greeley, where the facts are similar to these, the New York court stated—contrary to what your Honor has held here—that the executor has the right to carry on the contest against the will; in other words, that the very fact that the executor of the will of 1871 had a right to claim that that was the last will, the fact that he had & right to affirm that proposition of necessity involved the right to deny that some other will was the last will, because the affirm- Al;lor: of one was necessarily a negation of the other. The Court—I suppose, Mr. Delmas, you have not overlooked the reasoning of the court there, have you, which 1s to the effect that the executor becomes vested with the legal estate, the testator’s personal estate, and therefore has an interest in the property? Mr. Delmas—Is it not so in our State? Does not the same rule apply here? Tlllle Court—I have always understood differ- ently. Mr. Delmas—The decisions are the other way. 1 had supposed that that was the point of dis- tinction, though it was not pointed out in the argument, nothing was said about that, but I conjectured, because if this case is law, if it is correctly decided, it must rule the present case, The Court—I don’t think it is necessary to argue further upon that particular point. I believe that I did state in the oral opinion given here thatif the guestion were a new question, if it were not, I take it, controlled by authorities in this State the other way, I shouid feel disposed to yield to those New York cases, and allow the executor te file & formal contest; but not only once, but three times, has the Supreme Couri of this State de- cided that an interest in the fees of adminis- tration do not constitute a sufficient interest. Now, I may be wrong in my interpretation of those cases, but I feel bound by them as I un- derstand them. Mr. Delmas—I am not endeavoring, if your Honor please, in any manner to question the correctness of your Honor’s conclusion reached upon the contest. That has been decided, and I was merely answering your Honor's query, calling my ‘attention 10" the fact that in that case the decision was based, to some extent, upon the proposition that the title to the per- sonalty descended to the executor. The Court—I don’t place so much 1mportance upon that. I think that the mere right, what- ever I should hold, if I were not controlled by the three cases in this State, that the mere right to propound & will gives & right to con- test another will that is on ; but the Su- preme Court, I take it, has held otherwise, and ;ngl they overrule these cases I must follow em, Mr, Delmas—I am not undertaking to ques- tion those cases, but I merely undertook to call your attention to this passage, which is indeed the one that the case culminatesin: “The executors named in the will of 1871 have clearly, by statute, an express right to have that will proved, if they can establish the fact that it is the last will.” Is it not so here? The executor of the will of the 24th has by _ statute the right, ‘indeed, it is made his duty 16 propound that will for prooate, to petition for its probate, and they have a right to maintain that will. I continue: *If they can establish the fact that it is the last will.”” Now the right to go to & certain place certainly involves the right toremove from your path the obstacles that cbstruct your road to that piace. If I have a right to go from my front gate to my house I certainly have & right to remove from the avenue that leads from the gate to the house any impediment that some person unlawfully may have placed upon my property. 1f the ctitioners for the probate of ‘the will of the 24th have a right to heve that will probated, if they can establish it to be the last will, they necessarily have the right to overthrow every adversary who contends that it is not the last will, but that something eise is the last will. Now, whether you call that a contest or whether you say that thatis a right springing from the power and duty of peguon ng, is a mere discussion about words of no great im- Pofhe exeaut ding the wil e executors propoundin, e will of the 24th had a right and duty logupply for its pro- bate. They have a right to prove the allega- tions of the petition which they have filed for its probate. One of those petitioning allega- tions is that that is the last will and that noth- ing else therefore is the last will. If anybody steps into the arena and contests and cleims that something elge is the last will they there- by become antagonists, and, of course, a con- test, a legal contest, that is, a legal discussion, tekes place between them, to be waged by fsvf-i"n egal implement and weapon as to who ight. One more remark and L will leave this sub- ject, because I cannot but believe from the re- marks made by your Honor ou last Monday that while notinvolved in the opinion which you rendered it had undergone considerable examination aud discussion at your Honor's hands. Suppose that the will of the 21st had Justice Paterson and Mr. Justice Harrison. The ldst sentence is: *“While it has been held | 1n many cases that an administrator cannot &p- | pealirom adecree of distribution because he has 10 interest in the final judgment, whatever it mey be, yet that principle is in no sense | analogous to the right of an executor to sup- | port & will, especially 50 when it has been once | probated.” The executor has no right to sup- | port the will. That right may become more binding upon him, because he may feel surer of his ground when the will hasbeen probated, but the right to support thé will which nomi- nates him as executor is as perfect before as it isafter probate. He has the right to support it and in supporting it of course he has the right to repel all attacks.which would over- throw it. In reply Mr. Pierson “contended that there was no reason for going out of 'Cali- fornia to look for citations. Inhisconcep- tion the better course would be to seek for precedents in the reports of cases decided in accordance with the statutes governing such matters in this State. Other States, he said, had laws, in many instances widely variant from those of California; and hence decisions rendered in the courts of those States wére not always to bg taken as final in courts here. Regarding the matter of the two wills, Mr. Pierson was very emphatic in insist- ing that the court had no option as to the admission of the will of September 21, 1894. On tue ex parte proof already submitted, he contended that that will, though not the last made by the testator, was in view of the rulings of the court undoubtedly entitled to be admitted to probate. Garret McEnerney, representing Trus- tee Goodfellow, one of the executors of the will of the 21st of September, concurred in Mr. Pierson’'s view, citing a number of California cases in support of that posi- tion. Judge Slack then rendered his decision as follows: I have examined all those authorities last evening. They were all cited on the argument that took place here o1 another occasion. I am conversant with the case of Hathaway’s will, in 4 Ohlo St., because I examined it last evening; and also with the case from 33 Ala- bama, Blakely vs. Blakely’s heirs. Ithink I can give my decision now, gentlemen, without calling upon Mr. Delmas further in the matter. As I'say, I have examined all of the authori- ties that have been cited by counsel upon the previous occasion when this question was pre- sented, and the authorities that were cited the other day, I have taken great pains to go over them also. I have also taken the pains to ex- amine further for myself, to some extent, that is, to make sn independent examination, and I find that counsel have gone over the ground so thoroughly, that there is no authority one way or the other to be found, exceptit is in Schouler's executors, and pos- sibly counsel have found that slso, but have not referred to it, because the only authority which that author cites is not decisive, or does scarcely support his proposition. The .au- thor in section 71 says that ‘“contests may arise over the probate of conflicting testament- ary papers, each of which has been propounded as'the instrument truly entitled to probate. Here the object being to ascertain which, if either or any of them, embodies in testament- ary form the last wishes of the deceased, proof of the instrument of latest date comes first in grder. A similar rule applies where the va- lidaty of particular codicils is in dispute.” As 1 say.the only authority which he cites in su. port of that. proposition is thatof Lister v¥, Smith, 8 Swabey and Tristam, 53. However, it is hardly supported there. Counsel very well know that this court, upon the other occasion when the question was pre- sented, expressed its views to the effect that s formal contest should be filed to the applica- tion to admit the will of September 21 to pro- bate, or else the court intimated it would pro- ceed to hear the application. Upon looking over what transpired in those proceedings, I find that the main question that wasargued ‘was the question as to striking irom tbe calen- dar the proceedings relative to the propate of the will of September 21. The otler qrestion was not elaborately argued. It is tue that some of the autboritics recently cited were cited upon that occasion, but only a few of them, apparently. It seems to methat the pro- ‘ponents of the will of September 21 overlook the fact that the flflng of the will of September 24 is‘in a measure & contest—not perhaps a contest in the sense in whicn this term is used in the code. An opposition would be the more correct term to use. -, The will purporting to be executed on Se) tember 24 was filed in the same proceedings in which the will of September 21 was filed. It ‘would seem to me that the duty of the court in the premises, mflerendontly of any sug- estion from counsel, is to proceed with the earing of the application to admit to probate the will of later date, as being the orderly and correct mode of procedure. As suggested in the case of Hamilton’s will, in 2 Connelly’s reports, a case to which I think the court dia not give sufficient consideration when the matter was up before, if a will of earlier date admitted to probate and a will of later date is filed, it is the duty of the court to enter an order revoking the probate which has been Ehmwd the earlier will, unless the probate of e later will is denied. That 1s the pro. cedure that is indicated there. It is true it was not necessary for_the court to express itself in the terms in which itdid expressitself, but it seewms that that is the procedure where a will of earlier date is admitted to probate. That certainly is the proper procedure, to pro- ceed with the'will of later date when the will of earlier date has not at all been admitted to | Judge Paterson. In this answer he accepted the terms and the ground of_ battle offered by ex- It was alleged in the contest that that gentleman had a legal capacity to sue, and this averment was admitted. It was further alleged that the minors represented by Mr. Paterson were beneficially interested and therefore enti- tled to contest. Thiswasalso admitted by the answer. - In deference to the wishes of counsel an adjournment was taken until this morn- ing, when the fight will be taken up again and carried on with what promises to be no small degree of spirit on all sides. o ———— SCORES LAMOUREAUX. Julian Sonntag Says the Miners Never Expect to Get Any Benefit at His Hands. Tirey L. Ford telegraphed yesterday to Julian Sonntag of the Miners’ Association that matters look very favorably in Wash- ington to a passage of the mineral land bill now pending in Congress. “The Chamber of Commerce,” said - Mr. Sonntag yesterday, speaking of affairs in ‘Washington, “hassent word to Representa- tive Herman urging him "to do all in his power toward aiding the passage of the river and harbor bill, and private and individual dispatches from prominent men of this State have recently been sent with the same purport. *The miners of this State are looking with deep concern on the attitude of Senators Mitchell of Oregon and Stewart of Nevada. If these Senators should interfere with the passage of the mineral lands bill, they will be met by the Senators from Califor- nia, “The bill,” said Mr. Sonntag, ‘‘has re- ceived the undivided support of the whole California delegation—White, Perkins, ' Hilborn, McLachlan, Barham,j Maguire, Loud, Johnson and Bowers—and it has never been known in the history of this State where a delegation have worked with 50 much unanimity of feeling. “The bill has also received the indorse- ment of all the large commercial bodies of the State. They all recognize that if it passes it will redound millions of dollars to the advantage of California. “In Commissioner Lamoureaux we place no faith. He showed his hand when he granted for patent to the railroad com- pany over 260,000 acres of land auring the past few days. He is without doubt op- posed to every interest of the miners, and the miners of this State never expect to re- ceive any benefit or even get their rights at his hands.”” T A STANFORD CONCERT. Good Musicale Given by the Glee and Mandolin Clubs. A good concert was given last night in Metropolitan Temple by the Stanford Glee and Mandolin clubs, which are start- ing out on their annual tour. The work done by the Glee Club, accom- panied by the Mandolin Club, was the most interesting feature of the contest. The two organizations blended excel- lentiy, while the rhythm and sbading of the vocalists and of the strings accompany- ing them were absolutely one. *“Estu- diantina” and ‘“Ma Angelini” were the two selections rendered by the Glee and Mandolin_ clubs together, and both were charmingly performed. Although the latter came last on the programme the audience refused to depart till'it had been regenmd. oth] the Glee and Mandolin’clubs did good work ou their own account. The former’s singing was smooth and easy and was marked by plenty of expression. The rendering of *‘Courtship’’ brought the Glee Club a warm encore, to which the boys re- sgonded by Ainsmg that touching and effective ditty, “‘Pa’s Baby Boy.” “Wing ‘ee "’ “Phyllis Dyes Her Tresses Black,”’ and a good medley of college songs were also well rendered. The Mandolin Club, which played grace- fully and prettily, rfi 've among other selec- tions the ‘‘Stanford University March,” a clever and effective little composition by a member of the club named: Kaufman. Philip F. Abbott, the barytone soloist of the college orgfnization, sang a cavatina from “Faust” so acugubly that he re- ceived an encore, to which 'he responded by giving Rubinstein’s *“Azra.’’ Charles L. Dillon, the college humorist, took im- mensely with the audience, both as a singer of corzic songs and a reciter of hu- morous stories, must receive alicense lenge from the police. probate. Su flnea I should admit to probate the will of he 21st upon the argument that has been had, | There are 12,743 licensed members ‘of the ‘| know of such cases. confraternity in King Humbert’s realm., | children—one a paralytic—were starving. He declared that he had been a majorin the United States army, and that assertion at once aroused Mrs. Briggs' particular | sympathy. The address he gave. then | was 428)4 Vallejo street. We investigated | 1t and found two very respectable families living there and no information whatever about the man and his children. “On another occasion he gave the name Jemes Wilson. said he lived on 428 Six- teenth street; thwt his children were starv- ing and sick. Again we were informed, and we found that no such persons were known there. *It is only fair that the public should © =W call attention to them in our pub- lished monthly reports, but they reach enough. We think he ought to get & couple of thousand at least, and we want some smart lawyer to do the dickering with the compn:iy‘ Besides, my brother- in-law is very b: lg hurt and may die, and he wants his will drawn up so that his property, which amounts to several thou- sand dollars, will go to the right parties. “But are you authorized to represent vo;ir relative” in this matter?” asked Mr. 1ison. +*Of course I am,’” said the man, “but I don’t want to appear too prominently in the case, because 1Pwork for the company as a watchman, and if I am known to be figur- ing in the matter I may lose my position. _‘“All right,”” replied the attorne{‘.'wnh a vision of a fat fee floating before his eyes; “‘let us get over there and finish the matter up.” After loading himself up with law- books and legal forms they started. On the way to the ferry the man talked volubly of the manner in which the rail- road company could be handled by the right kind of 2 man, and asked Mr.Wilson to go easy on his relative, as the latter was somewhat close and_might object to a fee of more than $150. When near the ticket- office the man stopped and said : “Look here, Mr. Wilson, it might hurt. me if I went aboard the ferry with you, for all these people know me as an em- loye of the company and I'don’t want to ose my job. Now, as a matter of fact I spent my last cent coming over here and can’t pay my fare back. Just let me have adoliar and I will join you after you get on the steamer.”’ Under the circumstances Mr. Wilson could not well refuse and handed out the coin requested. That was the last he saw of his man. He waited on board the boat until too late to go ashore and had to make the trip across. He came back by the next boat and hunted industriously up and down the water front for the pseudp relative, but without success. Now he knows that he was flim-flammed and will be more careful in future. It is said that a number of other well- known attorneys have been victimized in a similar manner. 570 8 W PEB SGER Coniing Departure of Miss Daisy May Cressy, a Local Vocalist. IR The Bright Young Singer Intends to Go Upon the Operatic Stage. Miss Daisy May Cressy, a leading singer of the First Presbyterian Church, is about to leave for New York fo continue her vocal studies, under the direction of Mme. Pappenheim. During the Tavary opera season at the Baldwin, Miss Cressy sang for Marie Tavary, who was so pleased with the qual- ity of her voice that she at once recom- mended her to Mme. Pappenheim, who is a distinguished operatic instructor in New York. Miss Cressy’s voice is a contralto, rang- ing from low D to B, an unusual compass for one so young. During Dr. Haweis’ visit to this City Miss Cressy sang at one of his lectures. Although the doctor, is a theologian, he is also_a musical connois- seur, and pronounced her voice to be al- most phenomenal. | He “introduced her to his audience in a | glowing picture of her future succe:s, par- ticularly in comic opera. To this he| thought she was peculiarly adopted owing | to her bright personality, her expressive face and her joyous iaughter. Miss Cressy is only in her nineteenth year. Whiie possessing all the exnberance outh, she is not lacking in ambition and capacity for labor that must carry her to the goal to which she aspires. it has been ¢bserved that California has produced very many unusually fine voices, and the 11 there had been 228 cases of cruelty to ani- mals reported, all of which had been in- vestigated, and there had been twenty- five prosecutions, with fifteen convictions. Secretary. Charles B. Holbrook was eiected a trustee of the society in place of ‘W. H. Hockstadter, who recently resigned. The following_are the new members for the mont! ‘W. A. Rabling, J. H. Huls- burg, Mrs. W. B. Hooper, C. ' W. Hanson, Robert C. Howe, Charles McCarthy, Ru- dolph Jordan, Jr., Charles A. Clancy. NEW TO-DAY. 13 Red . Letter ,DaLS.” We figure this way: «May I ask where yougot your pretty tea-table®” «At Cal'fornia Furniture Company’s—Red Lete ter Days' you know—only $11.560.” “$11.50! Can it be possidle! I’ll have one too’* Do you see the point ? 2 new friends. 2 steady customers—can’t help but like our furniture and come again—steady cus- tomers. $11.50. Four different woods : Polished oak (quarter-sawed). Conden mare Mahogany finish. Choice of wood—$11.50. Notice the dainty upper- shelf, with Iittle brass rail. ing. ? Inlaid—Ilight ones with dark wood—dark ones with light wood—g$11.50 for your pick. Only 17 altogether—you know what that means. Carpets . Rugs . Mattings CALIFORNIA FURNITURE COMPANY (N, P. Cole & Co.) 117=123 Geary Street. Miss Daisy May Cressy, a Local Vocalist Who Intends to Go on the Operatic Stage. (Sketched by a “‘Call” artist.] only the 600 members of the Associated Charities. “The best way is for people to refer cases to us and then no one is imposed upon. *“This man is about 45 years of age and apparently respectable.” i HE BUNKOED WILSON. A Clever Grafter’s Manner of Ob- taining Coin From Unwary Legal Lights. The newest game of the grafters, wholive by their wits, is one that is ph.yad on men who are currently supposed to be the sharpest, mentally, in the community—the attorneys. It was worked successfully onJ. N. E. Wilson a fey days ago, and that legal luminary is still wondering how he failed to see the job that was being put up on him. A seedy-looking individual walked awk- wardly into Mr. Wilson’s office and in- quired for thelawyer. He was asked to wait a few minutes, and when Mr. Wilson .?pemd introduced himself as Mr. Foster of Oakland. “Mr, Wilson,” he said, ‘‘my brother-in- law has _just n badly hurt by the cars over in Qakland and we want you to come . for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, over and see what you can do with the company. The claim-adjuster has been around ‘and offered to settle with m relative for $800, but we don’t think that cause of this has been a question among musicians, both at home and abroad. Judging from all the encomiums that Miss Uressy has received from those besi qualified to judge; itis almost a foregone conclusion that she willadd another to the long list of successful California singers. WANT NO COURSING. The Cruelty to Animals Society Will Support Secretary Holbrook in Making Arrests. At the monthly meeting of the Society which was held yesterday afternoon, Sec- retary Holbrook laid before the board the ‘question of whether the society would be with him in attempting to prevent cours- ing in this County. 3 3 'he secretary gave an account of the ne inclosure for coursing, which is being pre- pared mear the Ingleside racetrack, and stated that in his opinion the way in which the inclosure was to be fenced in would make the coutsing practiced there cruel and unsportsmanlike. No resolutions were passed relative to the secretary’s statement, but the board gave Mr. Holbrook to understand, in an igformal way, that _he would be indorsed 0.0,00,0000000, Out To-day! P;H:,‘C;W“n’ hit of the century.”— “The most captivating stories ever pub- lisned.”—Boston. Globe. ® 1he Black Gal "FOR APRIL CONTAINS: TARTLING, TIRRING, TORIES! Original from Beginning to £nd! Fascinating from Head to Foot! Cleverly Told from A to Z! TheMystery of the 30 Milions ! By T. F. ANDERSON and H. D. UMBSTAET- TER. The unparalleled adventures of the ocean steamer, Oklahoma, whose dis: appearance with 643 human’ souls and thirty milifons of 2old threw two conti- . nents into a fever of excitement. The Man at Solitaria ! By GEIk TURNER. A realistic account of how the man at Solitaria ran the G, W. it R. to sult himself. A Surgical Love Gure ! By JAMES BUCKHAM. _An up-to-date rem- ed};ulor the love fever and ils unexpected Tesults. The Gompass of Fortung ! By EVGENE SHADE BISBEE. The weirdly \impressive tale of & man guided by sighi- ‘less eyes 10 an independens fortune. The Williamson Safe Mystery! By F. S. HesseLriNe. The solution of one of the most daring series of burg- larles ever concelved. How Small the World! By E. H. MAYDE. A triangularlove story in which two young people who hate each other in Massachusetis are brought. tolove each oihen in Colorado. ALLCOMPLETE! ALL CAPTIVATING! ALL COPYRIGHTED! and All for 5 Cents. ‘The Black Cat is sold by Newsdealers. 1f yours won't get It for vou, get another the society in his efforts to suppress coursing within the County limits, and that he could make all the arrests he thought "The report fos the monih showed that a newsdealer. 11 you haven's &' dealer send us stamps for the “Most fascinating five cents’ worth on earth” Address: The Shortstory Publishing Company, Boston, Mass.