The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-08-27
OHIO STEEL RANGES
PERFECT BAKERS
yesler Ava bafF ron taniR aiIro Ave-
II. g. MILES m Yeer Ave.. and Railroad Ave-
>s 7. DAVIDSON
PERFECT BAKERS.

stratfon stated that on June ;. fsss. on mo-
.fon OF T. M. Carr, attorney for the estate
y was ordered that the case Be re-nanded
20 the superior court and a distribution
,.iaue or the donation claim Continuing
ne said that the sole controversy was one
or land. What might appear conflicts from
tas alndavits would be decided on the rec
ords- The plaintiff claimed interest in the
donation claim by virtue of an assigned
hve-eighteenths interest He contsnded
tnat when the final account OF the admin
istrator was allowed. that settled his now
erty. NC ''oe
Inc administrator, however. proceeded
on the presumption that he had mower 10
sen. and obtained an order from the court
~ lssS 10 sell portion OF the real estate.
re haa been unable 10 And anything In the
records that showed the order upon which
the sale In 1893 was based but the sfhse-
qusnt orders referred TO such an order.
ne urged as against the validity Of the
SAFE the allegation that Joseph Rurgert
one OF the heirs OF Mrs. Yesier. died. and
no guardian was appointed 10 look AFTER
the interests OF the children in the estate
lie claimed the administrator had no DOW
e. TO sell land in the donation claim 70 pay
BACK taxes on lots in other additions Tn
ger the present laws property was not as
sessed 10 individuals. but simply by de-
scripuon. and the taxes become lien
u.
In speaking OF the allegations that the
descriptions OF property were misty, Mr..
stratton said that in the published notices
or sale the words westerly had been
substituted for ''easteriy." and other
changes made in the descriptions that
went to the heart OF the matter.
Mr. Preston said that the counsel had
evidently examined the case. but, from his
unfamiliarity with the estate, had misurl-
derstooc many OF the facts The estate
consisted of different classes OF property
n small amount Of cash, some gas stock
ana the east half of the donation claim.
She had mass of real estate that was
decided TO her after marriage. The pro-
bate court made the distribution OF money.
stock, etc, holding that all the property
was community except the donation claim.
An appeal was taken. Then the superior
court came INTO existence. and IL was held
that the donation claim was community
property. An appeal was taken by the adj
Hinistrator. and In the supreme court ii
was held that the donation claim was sep
arate property. The case was sent back
10 the superior court and the order set
aside. There was no distribution OF prop
erty. but later a petition for sale Of some
or the property TO pay accrued taxes was
obtained At the time OF Mrs Yesler's
death there were no heirs under age but
pending the proceedings one of the heirs
died, leaving children. This makes the
claimants spoken or by the plaintiff as
heirs of heirs. not heirs OF the deceased.
Some question was raised about the sale
or this property, and the supreme court
entered a supplemental order directing the
superior court TO proceed TO the sale OF
property to pay of debts. In the present
sale the court was acting under the ex-
press mandate of the supreme court. The
sale had been advertised at great expense.
and in the published notice of sale an ef-
fort had been made TO make the descrip-
ton of property as brief as possible. AS a
matter OF fact, the published notice COW
cred one whole page of the Weekly Post
Intelligencer.
Mr. Preston said the contention of the
plaintiff concerning the taxes would be of
no avail. as the sale of property In the Diff
ferent cases brought more than the taxes.
and the amounts had been applied in pay
ment. as the records would show. He re-
membered having had to make some
changes in the notices OF sale. but unless
his memory was very faulty the publica-
ton was intended TO comply with the Law.