Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1889-04-10
A WIDOWS CONTEST.
MRS. MURD0CK,S FIGHT FOR HER
HUSBANDS PROPERTY.
An Instance of Protracted Litigation
The Last Decision Appealed to
the Supreme Court.

dock, widow of Samuel Murdoch, against
the firm of Cox & Clarke, of this city. The
article in question appears to have been
written on information furnished by some
one on the plaintiffs side of the question,
and seeks to convey the impression that
the defendants had been for many years,
and still were, depressing poor widow.
The article starts out with the following
declaration
Numerous as are the cases of protracted liti-
CATION on the calendars of California Courts.
there is hardly one which possesses such time
defying powers as that OF Eleanor Murdoch vs.
Cox & Clarke. This cause has dragged YEARLY
on for over twelve years, and apparently the
end Is now as far away as when proceedings
were first instituted. There is a very wide di-
ve1gence between the financial status of the
plaintiff and that of the defendants. Messrs.
Cox d Clarke are well-known capitalists, own
ing ranches and stock farms all through the
northern part of the country. The plaintiff is a
widow with two children. Though the iecis
ion of two Judges have confirmed her claims to
an estate worth now 100000, she resides in a
small room down on Fourth street, and only
earns enough TO keep her alive by oloak-mak-
ing.
Then follows history of the alleged
facts in the case, which is lacking-accord-
ing 10 the statement of the defendants-in
many essentials of truth. For instance, it
is stated that Murdoch, in 1875, borrowed
some $1,000 from Cox & Clarke on about
5000 acres of land and 1,500 head of cattle
IN Big Valley, Lassen county, agreeing to
pay the same in one year, with II per cent
interest, and that finding that he was
only getting deeper into difficulties, he
invited his two creditors to handle the es-
tate themselves and after earning the
money due to them from its resources to
return the ranches to his family. This
they agreed to. Murdoch, who was in bad
health when he entered into the agreement
died in December of the same year without
leaving a will"
BEFORE THE COURTS.
The article quoted from then states that
the widow of Murdoch commenced pro-
ceedings against Cox & Clarke before Judge
Clough OF Lassen county, for possession of
the estate. The defendants claimed that
they had not received back their principal,
although they had occupied the land and
had sold the produce therefrom, as the ex-
penses had swallowed up the bulk of the
proceeds. The decision was in Mrs Muir
docks favor, and Judge Clough signed
decree ordering the defendants to quit the
land on obtaining a payment of $780,
Cox d Clarke appealed to the Supreme
Court and obtained an order for q new trial.
Judge Hundley of Oroville heard it next,
and in the autumn of 1884 he entered a
decision also in favor of Mrs. Murdoch.
His decision was filed just at the end of his
term. His successor in Office, the late
Judge Freer, was incapacitated from hear
ing it.
ANOTHER TRIAL.
The defendants filed very lengthy bill
of exceptions to Judge Hundley's rulings,
and these were submitted to Judge Keyser
of Yuba county, who ordered new trial
The whole ground was gone over again,
and after another long delay Judge Keyser
entered decision, ordering the estate re-
stored to her on payment of 500, 1852. This
was rendered in February last, and as
matter of course, so far as Mrs. Murdoch is
concerned, places the case back at its orig
inal starting point. Mrs. Murdoch intends
to appeal to the Supreme Court, and has
already instructed her attorney to prepare
the necessary papers.
A STATEMENT BY Mr. cox.
A representative of the RECORD UNION
called on Mr.. Cox yesterday afternoon and
asked him if the statements and conclu-
sions contained in the article were correct
Ar. Cox read it through carefully and said
No, it Is not correct-far from it. 1t
gives only one side of the case, and some
body has imposed on the Call, for many of
the facts as to the basis of the suit are mis-
stated and others omitted
Reporter-"Would you like to make a
statement yourself regarding the case ?"
Mr.. Cox-"Yes, a brief one. This arti-
Gle before me makes US appear like OPP
pressors of poor widow, when in fact we
are only seeking to get back good money
that was paid out to help man out of
trouble. Sit down and ! will give you a
few of the facts.
In the first place this money was not
lent by US as speculation. Sam Murdoch
was personal friend of myself and Mr..
Clarke, and we put ourselves out TO do him
good turn, and we did it, too. You see,
Murdoch owned a ranch away over in the
wilds of Lassen county, and as it could not
be made to pay he ran heavily in debt, and
was about to be closed out. So be came to
Sacramento-in 1875, / believe it was-ac-
companied by Sandy Parker, to whom
he owed S., 500 and wanted US to lend him
the money with which to pay it, Offering
TO give US title 10 the ranch TO secure its re-
payment. We let him have the money
Some six weeks later he came down again
and wanted 5000 more. He said he was
attached, and unless he could get this ad-
ditional sum of 5000 he would lose every
thing.
We concluded that unless we did some
thing in the matter Murdoch would lose
his ranch, so I arranged 10 go up there and
see how matters stood. We agreed, how
ever to let him have the money, but on
certain conditions. We demanded that
John Stsnto1-whom everybody knew to
be an honest man and capable and eco
nomical manager-should be allowed to go
on the ranch and run it at salary of SIS
per month, and that he should have the
assistance of Murdoch. All the produce OF
the place was to go toward paying the prin-
cipal and interest due us. Well, went to
Shasta, and found that he was
ATTACHED FOR $4,000.
l asked him how he expected to pay eff
that sum with 5000, and he vaguely re-
piled that ne thought he could fix things
up for that sum. / saw some of the Shasta
creditors, and then went down to Red
Bluff to see others who had claims for sew
eral thousand dollars against Murdoch. /
told them that was friend of Murdoch,
and had come there TO help him out of his
trouble. If nothing could be done to effect
a settlement of his Indebtedness for less
than the full amount | would go back to
Sacramento, throw him into bankruptcy.
and take my chances with the rest of the
creditors.
ITO be brief. ! finally effected a settle
ment between Murdoch and his creditors
Tor $500, ana saved MIN upward Oh Si,UUO.
Stanton was placed in charge of the ranch,
as stated, Murdoch declaring that he could
pay off the debt in year or so. He did
not do it, however. nor could he, as he had
no facilities for paying off anything. In
stead of there being l,500 head of cattle on
the place, there were Just $50; and in that
cold climate cattle do not thrive and breed
as well as in this locality. Well, Stanton
ran the place as closely as any man could
run it; the stock was sold from time TO
time TO the best possible advant-
age - Just as our own was sold
= and all the proceeds credited
up to the ranch Still it ran behind, and
always has. Ii we were anxious to lend
our money we could put it out here as fast
as we got it, on good security, instead OF up
there And, as matter of fact, the prop
erty was not worth the sum advanced on it
then. We were to get II per cent. interest.
il is true. but that was not high rate for
that section, and loan could not be
effected on the same property to-day at q
less figure"
mo" concluded Mr.. Cox, "we are not
depressing anybody. We put good money
into that ranch to help man who was in
trouble, and all we want is to get it out
again. We don't want the ranch, but we
do want our money. Moreover, Mrs. Muir
dock would get little or no benefit out Of