Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-05-23
THE MARX HOPKINS ESTATE.
Report Of the Referee on the Final &C
count of the Administratrlx

nepoIt OF the Referee on tHo A
count of the Administrative
In the Superior Court Department no
bate) at San Francisco yesterday, warren
Olney, the referee to whom was releIreu
the final account of Mary Frances Sher-
wood Hopkins, administrators OF inc esSate
of Mark Hopkins, deceased, nieu a ssaIe.
ment. The referee in his rePors say
The respective parties agreed curing 4 ta0
hearing that the account mignt DC leS'a.,
and have also agreed that the staIenie IL VI
account contained herein Is colreo' o'"A
to the following items 80 w c.
l. The sum Of $50. 600 paid D. W. oan-
derson for legal services. IN w H.
.. The sum of 81 700 paid H. W. mop
kins for services as agent NY IT
3. The sum of $500 PAID W. H. L.
Barnes for legal services.
4. The sum of S45, 372 80 PAID lor con-
structing a vault for the remains oil the
8 The sum of 1920, 900 claimed as com
missions by the administrative.
In the matter of the first item, after
hearing testimony of S. w. Sanderson, and
mon cross-examination, the referee re-
nerts in favor of allowing the claim OF
$39, 900. OF, ,oo
IL disaIlowed on the ground that the ser
vices of E. w. Hopkins were rendered to
the Administrative and not to the estate.
The credit of $500 paid to w. ID. l..
Barnes is disallowed on the ground that
his services were not for the benefit OF the
estate, but to defend the administrators
against proceedings in the Probate Court
for her removal.
The fourth count considers the objections
made by the brother of the deceased to
the payment by his widow OF $40, 5I2 80
for the purpose of constructing vault in
tine cemetery, The objection was that this
was not a proper charge against the estate.
The referee holds that this charge should
he allowed. The estate is valued at over
$50, 600, 900, and there are no creditors.
The deceased died childless, and his estate
goes to his widow AID brothers. Only
81. IS had previously been paid for
funeral expenses, and when the immense
amount of money to be distributed to the
heirs Has considered, and the absence of
all claims against the estate, it seemed
proper to him that a sum Of money should
he appropriated to establish a suitable rest
ing place for the repose of the body of the
deceased. The administrators is therefore
credited with the sum of S45,372 80 and
the objections disallowed.
The fifth count is concerning the objec-
tions that the administrative should not be
allowed a commission of 1920, 600, and is
in substance as follows An administrator,
in contracting with heirs that be shall re.
ceive a sum less than the law allows him,
as the commissions for settling up the
estate, does not occupy the position of a
man who agrees with me to do for me a
certain piece of work for a certain price,
and, therefore, to enable him to recover on
the contract, he must do the work for me
in accordance with the contract. In Mrs.
Hopkins case she was, at the time the
contract was made, already entitled to q
compensation under the statute, and if sLe
had been removed or resigned on that
day her statutory commissions would
have amounted to $4,000. What
she did was to agree that fol
what she had already done, and
for what she was still to do, she would only
claim the sum of 1920, 600 instead of the
S720, 600 to which she was then entitled,
and the commission of four per cent. upon
tributed. But on the other hand, if she
is not entitled TO the compensation pro-
vided for by the contract because she has
not complied with it, she cannot claim the
Etatutory rate, because to all matters ex.
oept the commissions the contract is a
valid and subsisting agreement between
the parties, and no doubt she, by other
portions Of the agreement, received a com.
pensation which, added to the 1920, 900, i;
equivalent to the commissions allowed by
law for settling the whole estate.
It is true the appraised value of the es
tate as fixed by the appraisers is before me
but when the Court comes finally to settl,
the commissions of the present admins
traitor, neither the Court nor the presen
administrator is bound by the figures of tn
appraisers, and therefore it is not Just t.
either the contestant or Mrs. Hopkins t,
now arbitrarily fix the compensation to b
allowed her.
therefore report that cannot at thi
time fix the commissions which should b.
allowed the administrators, and I repor
and recommend that the account immedi
ately following herein be allowed and con
frmed as the final account of the sal
administrative, and that she be charge
with balance in her hands of the sum
S9l9,747 80, and that the matter of he
commissions be left open until the fins
settlement of the estate, when she be q
lowed such portion of the S320,000 as th
amount of the estate distributed by he
bears to the whole amount of the estate.
The account annexed shows 1919, 747 8
in the hands of the administrator.