The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-08-25
no GROUND FOR INJUNCTION.
Mr.. Lowman Makes n Vigorous Re-
snnnko in the s. Il. Yealer Case.

SpOU0o ia tie -. h. u eSieT &aSs.
The a.lidavit of ]. -. Lowman, I'm an
ever to the petition of the Histogenetic
Medicine Company. on the basis OF which
the sale Of the Sarah Il. Yesler property
vas restrained by Judge Osborn. was filed
yesterday. Il denies all the allegations of
TIE petition and makes a vigorous defense
Of his action In the matter of the sale.
The hearing was continued by agreement
Until tomorrow morning.
In the beginning Mr.. Lowman denies In
general terms the material allegations of
the Histogenetic Medicine Company. and
states explicitly that no decree OF distribu-
ton Of the estate of Sarah b. YesIer has
ever been made by tho state supreme
court
NJ Lowman adds that he Is still acting
a. administrator Of the estate OF Sarah II.
Tester. aud SO far as his knowledge ex-
tends he has never been discharged as
such. All the sales referred TO in the
complaint were made under order from
the superior court, and, as the statutes re-
eusre. all persons interested I'm the estate
have been, from time to time. cited 70
show why such orders should NOT have
been made. The first sale was made in
pursuance OF specific order directing the
defendant as an officer OF the court TO
make the sale. and such order was made
after citation as the statutes require. The
sale was advertised. Deeds 20 portion OF
TIE property sold have been made and de-
hFsred and the prices paid. and the sums
expended by the defendant in the pay
meat OF taxes and charges upon the
estate. The pending sale referred 10 by
tae plaintiff was also by specific order Of
tae court and partially completed at the
Ins the restraining order was served.
Tee advertisement OF the sale was neces-
safIv lengthy. Surveys have been had
'oF ise purpose OF aiding the sale, local
advertisements given. maps and posters
prepared. all al large expense. Continu-
snf. MI. Lowrnsn says that the allegation
'ast The court was misled f. false in fact,
INA u Is not true that no deeds have been
'aa1e, because certain deeds have been
made and delivered He has continued
ne pending sale until August Is and -.
sns unless the restraining order is prompt
vacated the estate will lose the benefit
g nearly all that has been expended in
s7e way % preparation for Il. No person
ever appeared IN answer 70 any OF the
sass''eas made and published, to object 20
any proceedings taken pursuant thereto.
All o. the tracts Of land sold at the first
s3ss. TOR which deeds have not been de-
hfered. are heing reofTered at the pend
y sale the bidders n the first sale hav-
'ns failed 70 complete their purchases.
Aad upon tender o. deeds having refused
'e accept them
NJ. lawmaa thea moves that the re-
sVatiing order he vacated because OF the
a%ls'fy q the statements OF fact by which
- court Vas m3sled into granting Il. and
= .sosase 81 the great damage 70 the estate
tae order is extended. and because Il
.SSas never to have been granted in the
IFss instance. Il * stated further that
Even i III that the plaintiff said was
80. y lad complete remedy in probate
.seceeainss, ana Nauld object % the con-
Hfmation OF any sales.
Afwsvsv 49, -. -.