The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-04-24

This agreement was recorded and deeds
were passed. but since the death of Capt
Renton the plaintiffs claim to have discov.
cred that the share allotted to Capt Rem
ton was worth $1.775,Ooo, while the share
allotted to them was worth only $4,000
altogether. The plaintiffs also allege
that other property TO which Capt.
Renton held title was in fact
community property, namely, the stock in
the Port Blakeley Mill Company, the Pm.
get Sound and Gray's Harbor Railroad
and Transportation Company, the several
other mill and lumber companies. the Pa
cific Surety Company and the First Ma
tional bank Of San Francisco and the
lands mentioned already. the money in
bank and the Renton addition property,
although he falsely told them at the time
they signed the agreement that all this was
his separate property and refused to in-
clude it in the distribution. They claim it
10 worth $3.50. 900. the Renton addition
property being worth $780, 600 They were,
however, they say, ignorant OF these facts
and of the origin of the titles until after
the death of Capt Renton.
It is also alleged that Charles 8. Holmes
and his wife agreed with Capt. and Mrs.
Renton to give and bequeath their
interest in the firm of Renton,
Holmes & Co. to trustees acceptable to
Capt. and Mrs. Renton, to be held
by them until January /, 1900, for the ben
eft of their respective legatees in order
that the property might be kept together
as q unit without the introduction of
strangers, but the plaintiffs do not know
the nature of the transaction, though they
say that it was conditioned on the making
Of the community property agreement be-
tween Capt and Mrs. Renton about
the same time. They allege that it
was beyond the power of Capt. Renton
to make the agreement for the distribution
of the Sarah NJ. Renton estate because of
his relation to the estate as administrator
and trustee and beyond their own power
as benefciarles, and by reason of this and
the facts already stated, as well as that
Holmes was not . party to the
agreement, they claim that this agree
ment is null and void, that they
will not be bound by it and ask to have it
set aside by the court and that the COM
munity property contract be again de-
cIared in force, with the Campbells as
trustees. They also ask for an accounting
and redistribution between John A. Camp
bell as executor of Capt. Renton's estate,
in respect to the estate Of Mrs. Renton and
new division of Mrs. Renton's es-
tate, except such part as shall
remain in the hands of trustees under the
community property contract, and that
they may receive their share Of the profits
Of the trust property from the death of
Mrs. Renton. They offer to account with
Campbell, as executor. for all the property
they have received under their agreement
with Capt. Renton, and to join in rescind-
ing deeds as far as necessary to make
fair and equal division.
The plaintiffs allege that Charles S.
Holmes was appointed administrator of
Mrs. Renton's estate in California and has
refused to join with them as plaintiffs, and
is therefore made party to che suit
Maurice McMicken is also made a de-
PENDANT for the same reason, he being
administrator de bonis non for Kitsap
county. They also ailege that he was one
OF the attorneys for Capt. Kenton up to
the time Of his death and is now one of
attorneys for John A. Campbell as execu-
tor, and that as Capt. Renton's attorney.
with intent to aid Renton in defraud-
ing them in the matter of Mrs.
Renton's estate, he falsely represented to
them that the property they were to OBJ
tain under the division was as valuable
as Capt. Renton's share would be and
that the latter was worth only 500, 900,
and that relying upon his statements
they signed the agreement. They
also allege that about November 1, 1891,
McMicken entered into a fraudulent COM
bination with John A. Campbell, as ex-
ecutOr. Margaret A. Campbell and Mary
Campbell TO obstruct the plaintiffs
efforts to obtain their rights, and
to set aside the agreement for
the distribution of the property,
and with that object secured his appoint
ment as administrator de bonis non, and
as such failed to present their claims as
heirs Of Mrs. Renton against Capt. Rem
toms estate. That he refuses to resign
and is actively aiding the execution of the
fraudulent combination.
The plaintiffs allege that on January Is,
1898, they presented to John A. Campbell,
as executor OF Capt. Renton's estate, their
claim for money under the trust gro wing
out Of the estate of Joseph Sylvia, but he
and property due them from the estate of
Mrs. Renton was also rejected by him.
Based upon these allegations the plaint-
ifs pray the court to declare that the pro-
feeds of the investment made by Capt.
Renton OF the property of Joseph sylvia
are trust for the benefit of Sylva's
heirs and that Capt. Renton was merely
a trustee and that John A. Campbell, as
executor of William Renton's will dated
December l., 1876, and John J. McKinnon,
as executor under the will of August 4.
1870, must account for the trust fund with
all accumulations. That the agreement
by which a division of Mrs. Renton's estate
was made be annuiled and that all
deeds made under it be cancelled, that the
community property contract be declared
to have been in force ever since Mrs. Rem
tons death; that john A. and James
Campbell be named as trustees under
it to account to the plaintiffs:
that John A. Campbell be ordered
10 make an accounting of all Mrs.
Renton's property in the state of WASH
ingion and OF the community property.
including all the property falsely claimed
by Renton. except such as may be declared
trust growing ont of the estate of Josenh
Sylvia, and that they be awarded their full
share of Mrs. Renton's estate.
A temporary injunction IS asked to pre-
vent Campbell and Mckinnon from dis
posing of or incumbering any of the prom
er;y; TO prevent McMicken from preindic-
ing the plaintiffs rights; to prevent
all the defendants from ASSISTING
the executors in deuvine the nlaint,.f.,