The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, July 10, 1900, Page 1

{'?)Ll' “&i LXXXVIII—-N 40. . SAN FRANCISCO, TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1900. PRICE FIVE CENTS. PROBAIE | @i oot Sl Expose of a ne Upon the 1 & Among the Con- spirators. — e — & expose made ¥ ¥ € i 2 . who was concerned c the of Joseph E = he knows - : possession f Mr. possession of the Deposition. remarkable Public * o the » was tect or wh did livan, having stated 1 nd said that he receiv: Evergre Santa Clara had been forwarded horities of Lon- jured deposition home at 34 Soho ospective address s ities and Mr. Ruef stal authorities knew > & Donohue of e British Consul, rances of that fact. w that his own let- by the same authori- new n ing of him Upon this extraordi- rney Ruef, represent- ministrator, and John ing the rascai timate beir. This is the depositi Imposter Sails for Nome. More th this, Call reproduces s of John Sul- t written by the same Thes One is the signature to the depost were The « r livan to has rec hre ved from 1gh Abraham Ruef, payment f the estate of his brother, Jo- n, and Atiorney Ruef says the money represented by that estate s still in the possession of the Probate Tourt > Ruef says that the money was Creates| sternation| to John Sullivaxn | who signed the dep- | unty Clerk’s of- | > Admin- | RING el et efoloielo@ el : 7 + * + + * i ; 4 % X X ) x & EVIDENCE heir, as , and M to th rator for sixty das or es everybody in the case seems .t deeply grateful to Mr. Rauer. A ning his receipt in the office of Attor- Ruef.dnd assigning the entire estate ke Rauer, the bogus of his brother to J. disappea ¥ to produce produce him money from rney Ruef y and wa fused payment the ground that the sixty had expired. It 1s ad- at several I d dollars were ced by the Public Administrator through his attorney, Ruef, before the € @ became, thr ' of the court, the property of the tor. This, however, will not alter that the Public Administrator is > the court for the entire am which is more tk bt 3 : has, since the expose made b yesterday, d ded to hol L stribution in abeya John tien will have an opportunity of proving in court the truth of h <ibl s claim. is might b induced under 4 stances to turn ncisco. Jak Rauer, ims to advanced t € s he will leave nc ing un- to bring him back to San Francisco, and with a much as the law will ¢ him a#d his attorney in San have imposed upon him. is im- cccupies He ed t a simp assured the ests nd to the bog 1 ullivan James Tay- lor Rogers admits that it was Jake Rauer who persuaded him to retire from the casd and reach the conclusion that those ting nieces nd nephew who are 1 life in Soho Square, Lon- pe don, are not the children of the unfor e John Sullivan who vears ago. Mr. Re ays t a ve- \liar experience with t¥ ndoners ey wrote to him from London claiming heirship of Joseph and on Octo- ber 16, 159, he un ana a notice for m. an, Rauer Secures the Estate. On October 15 he sent these people ex- plicit instructions as to the course they should pursue in proving their heirship. Mr. Rogers letters were voluminou says he never received an answer to em. Notwithstanding this fact, and ing no reason to believe that he ever | ould hear from these people, on May 2. day before Judge Troutt was to stribute the estaie, James Taylor Rog- | served his petition for distribution Attorney Ruef and stated he was to prove that the John Sullivan produced by John Chretien was im- postor and that the nieces and nephew were the only legal heirs. The next morn- | ing, Mr. Rogers says, he was told by Mr. Raver. who was in court representing his | interests in the case, whatever they might | have been, that the nieces and nephew | | were impostors and that Mr. Rogers was | being imposed upon. | To prove ihis Mr. Rauer kindly offered | |to go with Mr. Rogers to the Hibernla | Bank and show by the records made there | | in behalf of Joseph Sullivan that his par- ents were not the same people whom the nieces and nephew claimed as their par- ent. Mr. Rogers said he went with Mr. | Rauer and satistied, from a copy of the record which he received from a | | elerk, that Mr. Rauer was correct and thereupon the Petition of the nieces and | nephew was dismissed. Rogers had seen the deposition of John Sullivan. It was therefore very careless in him not to have noticed that there was a discrepancy be- tween the account given by John Sullivan of his parents and that given by the nieces and nephew. The attorney had to | wait all those months, therefore, until Mr. Rauer cleared his mind of doubt. The clerk at the bank, whose name has been | used upon the authority of Mr. Rogers, does not recall the incident of the visit at all, as he never attends to the depart- | | ment where deposits are made and could | | not possibly have given Mr. Rauer the in- | formation which he said he had obtained. | Jake Rauer is quite as positive as Rogers EXPOSED BY THE CALL AROUSES ATTENTION OF THE COURT eOm T L e e o ! i SAE that they did go to the bank. Rauer is Iso emphatic upon other points. He in- sists that he is the injured party in the entire case and that he has lost $1850 if | Chretien’s client is a bogus heir. Rauer said ¥ ers ked up the question of heirs at the re different from those of the relatives = heirs. Rauer was at the bank for a pose of his own, however. He had been asked by one of his client . who was going to Nome, with some money. Chretien told him that his cllent had 1 estate of $2500 coming to i and he wanted Rauer to take it up and advance the money to his client. Rauer wis 1 to make sure”of the fact that the xd Sullivan and the depositor of the Hibern Bank were the same per- went out to the bank to com- signature of the depositor Sulli- t of Sullivan the deceased. satisfied him nd took an order in return. paid his mcney vet. San Quentin Threatens. saw the heir, and knows of him is from what told by Chretien. He says a W e the decree of distribu- tion Chretien came to him and showing a power of attorney asked for the loan of $500 for Sullivan the heir. Rauer let him have ghe money for a bonus of $100, and s0 h with he as that made payvable to Sullivan. of the case yesterday Rauer tisfied that the man Sullivan preper heir, although I never saw know him only through what Chretien told me. 1 took up the estate solely upon what representations were made to me and upon the orders of court I have not asked for my money yet, but when I do, if T do not get it there will be trouble. 1f that man Sullivan is a bogus heir I'll 3 sent to San Quentin, worth five nd Chretien, too. It will be ndred more to get even.” George T. Kno: the notary before whom th depos] of Sullivan was taken, de s he | had nothing to rln)" with the « “When a man comes to me to have s testimony taken he comes upon an ord of court, and 21l T do is to W r him and see that his answers are properly recorded,” said Knox yesterday. *] remember when Chretien and Ruef to have a deposition taken, my office is small they agreed that 1.should take it in Ruef's office. There was only one witne: a man named Sul- livan. 1 had never seen him before, but Thretien said he yas the man mentioned in the order of codrt, and so I swore him ame to me and (ook ks testimony. 1 do not remem- ber what he said, but 1 do remember that wit a few days, certainly within a week, 1 had the deposition transeribed and sent a copy of it out to the County Clerk’s office to be filed. I sent the copy for filing out to the County Clerk by a messenger boy. Mr. Ruef has a copy of the deposition now. As for the witness (Sullivan), 1 had never seen- him before and I have not seen him since. Chretien told me he was the man whose deposition I was to take under the order of court, and 1 swore him and took his testimony.” Neryous Tension Prevails in Court. The tensioh that tells the story of sup- pressed excitement seemed to prevaill among the many spectators who congre- gated in Judge Troutt's court early yester- day morning. They had gathered to listen to new developments in the Sullivan es- tate scandal and to be ready on adjourn- ment to sit in the “post mortem” exam- ination they knew would follow the pre- | sentation of the defense of the principals in the conspiracy. At the hour of 10 | o'clock Judge Troutt entered .the court- room and was immediately approached by Attorney Ruef, who informed the court that he desired a hearing in regard to the Sullivan estate expose. Judge Troutt in- formed Mr. Ruef that hé had ordered a hearing for this morning, but finally yield- ed to Mr. Ruef’s request that he be grant- ed an opportunity to make a statement. Judge Troutt took the bench, and Ruef, while the lawyers in court gathered around him, including Reuben H. Liloyd, who subsequently addressed the court as “amicus curiae,” rose to make his an- nouncements to the court. Judge Troutt, however, opened proceedings. HeVsal terday that he and Rog- | k., and Rogers found that the names | the parents of the deceased Sullh‘an] Chretien to accommodate | He has not | i “In regard to the estate of Joseph Sulli- van, 1 desire, Mr. Clerk, that notice shall tto that is, Mr. Ruef, L this morning, and James | Taylor Rogers and John M. Chretien, to appear to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock. 1 desire that a special effort should be made to have them appear In this ease. “1 think it 1 my duty to the bar to state concerning this matter that the deposi- | tion purporting to be that of John Sul- | livan, who claimed to be a brother of deceased, is here and has been ever since | it was presented to the court, on which | deposition the court acted, and all of the counsel in the case, there being three, representing different interests—the attor- | ney for the Public Administrator, the at- | torney for the absent heir, brother, and | the attorney for the contesting heirs. They were all here without question and | the deposition was sufficient upon whigh | to distribute the estate. However, Mr. | Ruef has very kindly informed me this ! morning that the estate has not been di | tributed; that is to been made, but the ma session of the Probate Court “If your Honor please,” said Mr. Ruef, “1 think, in justice to this court and in | justice to Mr. Drinkhous: | to myself, T should make a statement i regard to the article published, and giv the newspaper publishing it an opportuni- {15, to retract it if so desired. $ ““We took out letters of administration | according to law. We were informed that | Joseph Sullivan had a brother living in | London. We asked the British Consal through nis attorney and personal investigate the matter, which he through the Foreign Office. Here letter stating that the brother was nu | longer there, that he 7id not reside at | Soho square, that he (# i _be found. | The following is the. lecter: “A. Ruef, Esq., 402 Montgomery st., San Francisco. ‘Dear Sir—Our London agent reports that he has seen three John Sullivans, all them is the right man. Have you not the address of John Sullivan, Joseph's brother, in your office? There is no John Sullivan, tailor, now living in Soho square. “Yours faithtully, “CORMAC, DONAHUE & BAUM.' | Statement Regarding Rogers’ Ap- pearance. | “Subsequent to that J. Taylor Rogers ap- peared in this case, representing two al When the petition for dis bout to be filed Taylor n this court and filed a counter petition. On ‘my statement to vour Honor that there was ,a dispute as %o who was the heir your Honor directed the case to be postponed until the next | day for investigation. The next day Tay- lor Rogers came into court and said that he had been at the Hibernia Bank, where the deposit of money belonging to ihe estate had been made, and that he found that tha peopls whom he represented had a difterent mother; that is to say, the mother's maiden name, both her first name and her second name were differ- ent from the two names of the mother of this decedent, and in open court he stated to your Honor that the John Sullivan whom Mr. Chretien was then represent- ing, and who was in court the day before, but not on the day of the decree of dis- tribution, so far as 1 remember, was the true heir, Then your Honor allowed the deposition to be read in evidence and the estate was ordered distributed. “The deposition was taken, if your Honor please, before the petition for distribution was filed, or about that time, because the person who claimed to be the heir claimed that he was in urgent need of a small amount of money, and the deposition was taken, not so much for use in this court as for the protection of the administrator in paying out a small sum of money, two or three or four hundred dollars, upon his own responsibility to this heir. Sub- sequently, the heir being in court on the 3rd of May of this year, the deposition was used upon the 4th, because he was not present, and the deposition had been flled here by the notary, Mr. Knox. Ruef Defends Notary Knox. “In this connection I desire to say that Mr. Knox's relation to that affair was ply that of an ordinary notary who mwmxnwqumuou His pleture is in the paper, With those of the other looters of this estate, most' as-anything that occurs in the article / | leged nieces. tribution was ubc Rogers appeared i the decree has| ter is still in pos- | and in justice | taflors, residing in London; that none of | SHEDS LIGHT ON I e O e T i i o e e S S o | | elapsed. | the interest of the heir in the ANDINVESTIGATION WILL AT ONCE BE AD TO PROBE THE / H eiesdefebe e CHARACTERISTIC ATTITUDES o TSAKE" RALER, lating to your Honor or myself. And I wish to say that the article itself oes not say anything derogatory either to your Honor or ourselves in express terms, but simply by the headlines and the pub- lcation of our pictures; otherwise other rroceedings would be taken against the paper which has the hardihood to malke even these Implied assaults, “Moreover, the deposition which is re- ferred tg as having been stolen from the files is here and the clerk has it. have looted the estate and have sto! the money, implying that your Honor and myself and others have had a share in this looting. [ desire to now that the money nas not been paid ov but s in the hands of the adminsitrator, that a the time that the decree of distribution was made application was made to the | s administrator to pay that money, but upon my advice he refused to pay it until the time for appeal from the had At that time, May 7, 1900, we Mr. J. J. Rauer, who man, had purchased ate, after his investigation, and having r were notified tha a shrewd busines ked his money upon it, we were o some ex- tent satisfied, in addition to the proof here, that the right man w the John Chretien, if Suilivan represented by Mr any doubt had before existed. “Moreover, a bond s furnished to us by a surety com! anteeing us against any possible harm or damage or lo: so insistent the estate e money. saving But they we: every dollar in that the surety company required they did not pay it. The bond was in our po: sion for a long time. 1 think it wa turndd last week to the surety company and is still in the possession of Mr. RIg- by, the attorney, the attorney the surety company. The mone pessession yet. Rauer Appears With Assignment. “On last Saturday the sixty days from the time of the filing of the decree had elapsed and Mr. Rauer came with his as- signment to the office of the admint T in our | trator and requested the payment of the been en- | Wwe | money to him, as he would hav titled to had the sixty days elapsed. demanded a certificate from the County Clerk that the sixty day: The County Clerk furnished him such a certificate. We telephoned out again’ for further assurance and found that instead of its being ‘the 7th upon which the de- cree had been entered, it had been filed on the 7th, and through inadvertence the clerk had certified that it was entered on the T7th, but the decree entered until the 12th, and we put these people until the 12th to get their money, on which day the sixiy days would have expired; and fortunately for | this court and for ourselves, by the small interval of three days we are saved from having a charge made against us that we paid this money out knowingly for the purpose of defrauding somebody whose name does not appear in the papers nor in the article. “1 wish to saynow, if your Honor please, that if your Honor wiil instruct us to that effect we will not pay over that money to any person until the further order of the court in the premises.” The Court—That certainly is the order and desire of the court. Demands Presentation of Proof. Mr. Ruef—I now ask that in view of the serious charges that have been made against certain officers of the court, not myself nor Drinkhouse nor your Honor, but Mr. Taylor Rogers and Mr. Chretien, that these people who have published the | article be cited to appear here with proofs that this man is not the man that he claims to be, and I ask that the citation be issued to the proprietor, the publisher, the editor and the reporters of The Morn- ing Call, directing them to appear in this court and show to your Honor that the Mr, John Sulltvan who received this money according to the order of the court is not the John Sullivan who is entitled to it. The Court—For the present I do not de- sire to put the burden upon anybody to prove a negative, but I desire to investi- gate furthet as to whether this man is the {::- ox; ‘whether thm‘hhuhbqn an at- Ipt o upon the Publie Admin- itor, the attorneys and the court. from the date | of the entry of the decree had eiapsed. | PROBATE CRIME | Mr. Ruef—I will state further that at the time the hearing came up it was stat ed that a man named Martin Murphy of Santa Clara County was familiar with all the facts and knew this man in Londonm, knew his family and knew the decedent. | A commission was issued, the same as the | deposition here was taken, a commission was issued to take the deposition of Mar- tin Murphy, but the taking of his depo- | sition, upon the assurance that Mr. Mar- Again, | 1t is sald that Mr. Chretien and others | en all tin Murphy would be in court when want- ed, was dispensed with: 1 will state now, for the benefit of this paper, if it desires any further information about it, that the place where Mr. John Sullivan, the person who is supposed to be the heir, came from in this State was Evergreen, Santa Clara | County: to that that was the address given us, and that he worked upon Haggin's sck farm out near Sacramento. We verified all these statements. Mr. Bow- den, an attorney of San Jose, represented this alleged heir—I think Mr. Nicholas Bowden of San Jose representkd this al- leged heir, John Sullivan, prior to the ! time that Mr. Chretien represented him as ss that might result from paying over | at when it finally came to paying the $60 | in fact for | | to anybody for any £ the man from Santa Clara County This article was published this morning without any investigation, without having come to the office of the Administrator or his attorney, and without having inquired of a single person other than the anony- mous furnisher of the infofmation to the paper, who perhaps has no connection with the case, and whom we do not know. Sullivan His Own Identifier. 1 wish to state also that we have this case acknowledgments by notaries o the signature of this John Sullivan as be- ing the man that he represents himself to be. So that in every possible way we have guarded against the possibility of fraud, we do in every case The Pub- dministrator, Mr. Drinkhouse, during rm of office, never paid out a dollar purpose whatsoever without being sure that the person to whom he paid was the proper person. In this particular case it was reported to us that the man was in London, whexn he finally turned up in California. If we had paid this mcney out, even If we had done so fraudule or otherwise, to any- body Mr. Drinkhouse £till personally liable for paying it to the wrong man and not to the person who was really the heir. We would have been obliged to pay it twice had we paid it out wrongfully once. No possibly result to Mr. Drinkhouse or to his attorney from making a false payment to anybody in a case of this kind because at any time the full amount of the money in his would have been at the disposal of the | | true heir had this man proven to be the | false heir. had not been | ofr | The Court—You will be able to be here to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock? Mr. Ruef—I will be here to-morrow morning or any ~ther day. Court Informs District Attorney. The Court—I desire to say also that in | the effort to ascertain whether any wrong has been done here and whether there has | been any imposition upon the court by a man claiming to be the heir when he is not the heir, I have consuited the District Attorney on als coming to his office, and asked him to co-operate with you, Mr. Ruef, and with the court in the effor: to get at the facts. Now I will take steps to see to it that sufficient preof is here, if there has not been alrcaly. and I desire to know at this time whether you recall | the appearance of that man who claims® to be the heir, in court. Mr. Ruef—Yes, sir; very accurately. Tie Court—Who was in court here? Mr. Ruef—I examined him. The Couri—l1 have some recollection of it, but I can’t recollect all these things. Mr. Ruef—He was upon the stand here. He was a short, thickset man, with a red- dish mustache. He gave all the facts ac- cording (o what we had of them and ac- cording to the records of the banks; we | verified those ourselves afterward. Tre Court—I have an impression that T requested particularly that he take the stand. Do you remember that? Mr. Ruef—I recall that circumstance; he was on the stand. The Court—I can’t recall all the cireum- stances; it Is impossible for a man in my foa‘i't‘.lon to do so; my memeory is not equai o Mr. Ruef—It is unfortunate that such things can be thrown out broadcast throughout the land without anybody af- | % g | would have been | advantage could | SCANDAL ——— Dare Not Produce the Bogus Heir, Who, It Is Said, Has Sailed for Cape Nome Gold Fields. i — fected having the right or the opportu- nity to defend himself. The Court—I appreciate that.*I think the publication in The Call thi was entirely voluntary. The w has been a surprise to me. If the one who | wrote this article had simply come to the | courtroom clerk he would have had the deposition for Inspection. Mr. Clerk, this deposition has been in your possession how long? The Clerk—Ever since June 12 Ruef Takes Extra Precautions. Mr. Ruef—We have an exact copy of It for our own protection. We have all these | papers thich I have made reference -to | and they are at the disposal of the court | or of this newspaper at this time, as are also all our books, in connection with this | estate, or any other estate, that was ever | In_Mr. Drinkhouse’s office or in my office. Mr. Lloyd—In cofisulting with some of the members of the bar who have read the publication we think on account of the charge that has been made that it is the duty of the court to thoroughly Investi- | sate this matter and in order to do so properly it must keep control of the case. As 1 understand from the statements of counsel, three days have to elapse before | the decree would become final. I think therefore it is a duty to the court and to the members of the bar and to the heirs of the estate that an order should be made now setting aside that decree. Mr. Ruef—If your Honor please, the de- cree can be set aside, as I understand it, any time within six Mr. Lloyd (interrupting)—In sixty days it becomes final. Mr. Ruef—In sixty days it becomes final upen the question of al upon the evi- dence. I think it would serve the pur- pose better to make an order to show cause why it should not be set aside. can have It set aside to-morrow mors | at the time the order to show causs s re- turnable. X Lloyd Acts as Court’s Friend. ! We Mr. Lloyd—I suggest that a short order 0 show cause to-morrow morning be pre- pared and that no longer time by owed or the decree may be: The court—I appre fate v suggestion of _counsel act amicus | curiae. I feel tR#t we can set aside the | decree to-morrow merning. I think t the safer course. 1 appre gestiops made by members of the bar to I(he court. It was very startling what I | read this morning in the paper. Of course | it was entirely unexpected. I am very | 81ad to be in a position to investigate at | onee. I shall do all that Is possible—as er a wrong others will—to ascertain wh has been committad. Mr. Lloyd—I will prepare an order. Mr. Ruef—Mr. Chretien not only ap- peared under an order, but he has a powsr | of attorney, which I have In my posses- | ston, signed by this man and acknowl- | edged before a Notary Public in this city, under which he has been acting. 1 The court—Let all of the papers in this | matter be here to-morrow morning and have notice given to Mr. Chretien as weil | as others to appear at that time. Additional Facts Regarding Case. A few facts relating to the estate still remained to be told by Mr. Ruef after the adjournment of court. In his posses- sion there remains a receipt showing that so far as “John Sullivan” and his “at- torney in fact.” John M. Chretlen, are concerned, Administrator Drinkhouse is discharged of lability. e begins the story and as told by Mr. Ruef follows: After the appearance of the alleged heir,” said Mr. Ruef, “who was repre- sented by Mr. Chretien, and within a few s of the cc sion of the proceedings that would have resulted in a distribution to him of the properties of the estate in my possession, Mr. James Taylor Rogers appeared as the alleged repr foreign heirs of the decedent. pearance resulted i delay Chretien and his am and anxious for money. Yielding to their constant demands this office advanced some money and finally, after Mr. Rogers had withdrawn his application for distri- bution of the decedent’s properties to the alleged heirs he represented, Mr. Chretien and ‘John Sullivan’ gave me information that they had negotiated with J. J. for the transfer to nim of all th est in the estate. For the purpose of pro- tecting Mr. Drinkhouse 1 conducted the matter of receipts. John Sullivan, thé al- leged heir, and Mr. Chretien, his attorney in fact, presented me with a receipt in which they acknowledged possession of the distributivé remainder of decedent's estate. To protect Mr. Rauer from loss fof the moness he had advanced, I pre- pdred a receipt setting forth that there had come Into my possession the distribu- tive remainder which [ held subject to the order of Mr. Rauer, but pending the final order cf the court after the termination of the life of right of appeal from the order of distribution. A copy of this doe- ument I still have in my possession. The original I gave to Mr. Drinkhouse for de- livery to Mr. Rauer after the receipt by me of the acknowledgment by ‘John Sul- Mvan' and Chretien that all due them had come into their possession. Whether | or not Drinkhouse has delivered this | ument tp Rauer I am unable to say. That | matter, however, is not one which con- cerns this office. Mr. Drinkhouse and myself have been extremely cautious re- | garding this estate, and the expose In this | morning’s Call has saved Mr. Drinkhouse | something over $3000 if the allegation that | Chretien’s client is a bogus heir is true. | Heirs’ Appearance Excited Suspicion. ““The pecullar appearance of the heirs |in this estate excited my suspicions from | the beginning. I rang up Mr. Rogers | shortly after he filed appearance as the representative of the three foreign heirs and solicited his haste in settling the estate. He said that he had not yet made connections: that he had not seen the Sul- livan- family tree bud before him in a manner that demorfStrated the truth of his cllents’ claims. and hence he would have to stand by his legal rights and de- mand further time. At a subsequent hearing, however, Chretien informed At- torney Rogers that he could prove that | the foreign ‘heirs’ represented by the lat- ter were not the heirs of the deceased by the medium of the records in the Hiber- nia Bank. Subsequently 1 was Informed that Mr. Rogers had withdrawn his de- mand for a hearing on behalf of his al- This and restless ent CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO. /