The San Francisco call., 1895-07-17
SENATOR FAIRS WILLS,
Governor Budd Knew of the
Existence of the Last Two
Instruments.
THE TRUST CLAUSE Is VITAL.
How Charles Fair Will Proceed to
Get His Share Of the
Estate.

Attorney Goodfellow's statement that he
had two more wills, made at the instiga-
ton of the late James G. Fair, has caused
a good deal of comment. Concerning this
statement Governor Budd, who was re-
tained by Charles Fair as consulting at
torney and legal adviser shortly after the
death of his father, said yesterday:
l have of late been unable to follow the case
as closely as / would like to, owing to the
enormous amount of business at sacramento.
the absence of Mr.. knight at its beginning. l
was called in by Charles Fair as adviser. At
that time was thoroughly posted in regard to
all the points involved, and many months ago
was aware that Mr.. Goodfellow had two more
wills in his possession.
You will remember, however, that an ap-
plication for an order of the court to produce
all papers in the case was overruled, and at
that time Attorneys Goodfellow and McEnerney
made an affidavit to the effect that they had no
will later than the date of the one submitted.
That, of course, was stated to-day by Mr.. Nc
Enerney, but l knew, as did others OF Mr..
Charles Fairs attorneys, that Mr.. Goodfellow
had other wills in his possession.
What would the appearance of other wills by
James G. Fair Indicate?
Simply that he was inclined to jump from
one idea to another. 1t would be good evil
dence that he was not settled upon his desires
in any one of them That, however has no
particular significance in the discussion, nor
has it any great weight from legal standpoint.
What weight would the Craven will have in
court?
Well, its weight depends upon whether it
can be proven to be genuine. Even If it is
there are other questions to be settled which
are OF more Importance. You see the Craven
Will does not make any radical changes over
those which Charles Fair has been contesting
for. see by the evening papers that DR.. Lev
1ngston's name is mentioned in connection
with the Craven will, and it is suggested that
he would use the same by dragging himself
into court with it, seeking to petition for spe-
cisl letters in the matter. can only say that
ity OF his being Health Officer never had any
connection. What he proposes to do is not
known to me, but / am positive the Craven
will and his political ambitions are separate
from one another. Aside from these points
that have outlined to you am not able to
discuss the Fair wills at great length, and had
no intimation that the public was in posses
sion of the fact that Mr.. Goodfellow had two
other wills until you informed me of it.
If the trust will is smashed there is no
will. 1t is well known around San Fran
cisco that previous to the date of the trust
will Charles Fair and his father had a dis
agreement which resulted in the Senator
making a will disinheriting the boy. A
contest of the trust will resulting in its
| smashing would cause the opposition to
bring forth the will disinheriting him,
which is one of the two wills now in the
In the event of his not smashing the
| trust will he will be disinherited by its
terms, but at this juncture the law is ex-
| pected to step in and decide, according to
| the code, that trust cannot be created
under such conditions in law.
| This trust will is the strong hold of the
opposition and an attempt will be made to
secure It's admission to probate, which can
not occur so long as the trust clause pre-
walls. If it is admitted to probate that sec
ton referring to trusts will be eliminated
and in that event the trust, which is prac-
| tically the managing agent of the estate
will be wiped out, and the control thus
passes into the hands of the legatees and
the devisees, of which Charles Fair is one.
If he accomplishes this result he will get
all the money left him after due admins
tration. The Craven will provides for
about the same things as the trust will
with the trust clause wiped out.