Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-06-18
A DISPUTED ESTATE.
Two Administrators Appointed by
Two Courts in One Case.
THE QUESTION ONE OF RESIDENCE.
1t Makes Big Difference Whether Million
aire Robertson
LIVED IN THIS STATE OR IN NEW YORK
ESPECIAL TELEGRAM TO THE DISPATCH. ]

ESPECIAL TELEGRAM TO THE p1sPATcH.l
HUNTINGDON, PA, June 1.-THE settlement
Of the estate of Millionaire L. A Robertson,
who died in Brooklyn q few months ago,
promises to meet with very interesting en-
tanglements. Letters of administration
were granted on his estate by the Register
OF Brooklyn a week after his death, and i'm
mediately thereafter a furore was created
by the appearance of a woman who alleged
that she was Robertson's wife, and laid
claim to her right of dover. Robertson was
known by all his friends and relatives as q
bachelor. No one ever heard him speak of
being married, and the woman in the case
was challenged as an impostor, which was
subsequently proven, and a confession of
guilt was secured.
Now a new complication arises. Certain
relatives of the deceased, who will profit
more literally if they can show that Mr..
Robertson was a resident of Pennsylvania
instead of New York, have had letters of ad-
ministration issued by the Register of War
ren county, this State, so that now two diff
ferent parties are acting as administrator,
one under the laws of the State of New York
and the other under the laws of Pennsyl-
vania.
He Died Without a VIII.
Mr. Robertson died intestate leaving prop
erty, real and personal, worth S2,0o0,OOO, To-
Gated principally in New York, PennSyl-
vania and West Virginia. Under the intestate
laws of New York. the surviving children
OF a decedent's dead uncle or aunt do not
inherit the share of their father or mother,
while in Pennsylvania they do. Such state
OF facts exists in this case and the children
of Mr.. Robertson's deceased uncles or aunts
are, therefore, trying to prove that their
cousin was resident of ofPennsylvania at the
time OF his death and not resident of New
York II they can succeed in proving this,
each viii get q magnificent sum; if they fail,
they ill not be entitled to cent. Mr.. Rob-
ertSon'S surviving uncles and aunts are
anxious that their nephew's estate should be
settled under the laws of New York, as the
adjudication of the same there would make
each of them richer to the extent of several
hundred thousand dollars. No nearer rela-
tives than uncles and aunts survive.
The Register of Warren county, this State,
issued the letters on evidence which showed
townships of tnat county; that he had been
registered there as a voter, and as such had
paid tax in 1889 and 1890.
Evidence for the New York Parties.
The letters OF administration granted by
the Register Of Brooklyn were based on the
prima facie evidence that Mr.. Robertson
died in that city, and had lived most Of his
time at one of the principal hotels.
Another interesting feature of the case Is
that If Nh. Robertson shall be declared to have
been a resident of PENNSYLVANIA, the State
the whole of his S2, 600 COO estate, no matter
where the property is located: whereas, If it |
shall be determined that at the time of his |
death he was n citizen of New York, the |
State will only collect its per cent on the |
value Of what estate there may be in Penn |
sylvania. The Mapleton tannery here is ap-
praised at S275, 600. and the Warren county /
property is worth S5OO01O.