Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1895-08-27
IN THE SUPREME COURT.
Decree in Case Of Perea VS.. Harrison
Request for Modification of Order
in Information Concerning
CatrOn and Spiess Denied
Argument This
Forenoon.

In the matter of Pedro Perea, admins
traitor, appellee, VS.. George W. Harrison,
administrator, ct al, appellants, the de-
cree of the lower court was affirmed with
certain notifications; and it was found
that the said George W. Harrison had in
his hands, as administrator, the principal
sum and accrued interest of $35,s69T;
that the solicitors for the com lainant
should be allowed for their services 10
per cent of said amount remaining in the
hands of Harrison; that the said Pedro
Perea, as administrator, was entitled to
the statutory commission of $1,943.4S;
that the compensation of the special
master shonld be reduced to the sum of
$500; that the solicitors fee, the admins
traitors commission, the special masters
fee and the costs of the cause should be
paid out of said fund, and that Harrison
might retain in his possession seventeen
twenty-sixths thereof, and that he should
pay over to said Pedro Perea, as ad-
ministrator of Jose Leandro Perea, de-
ceased, the remaining nine-twenty sixths,
to be distributed to the heirs as follows:
Jose l.. Perea, Benicio F. Perea, Mariana
Perea, Jacob Perea, Pedro Perea, Beat
rize Perea de Armijo, Soledad Perea de
Castillo, Josefa Perea de Costello, and
Barbara Perea de Yrisarri. one-ninth
each.
IT was further adjudged and decreed that
Harrison should pay into the office of the
clerk of the supreme court, by the 26th
day of September, 1895, a sum sufficient
to pay the costs and the several sums
above named and that he pay over to
Pedro Perea, as administrator, nine
twenty slxths of the residue within like
period, and that the clerk forthwith dis
tribute the same to the parties entitled
thereto and take their respective recei pts
therefor.
The argument of the case was con-
Quoted by Mr.. Neill B. Field for Mr..
Perea and by W. B. Childers for DR.. Har-
rlson.
The argument of Charles Bent ct al,
appellants, vs.. Guadalupe Miranda ct. al,
appellees, and the Maxwell Land Grant u
Thompson ct al, appellants, the cases
being heard together, was concluded yes
terday evening and the cases taken under
advisement. Messrs. Yeaman and McNeal
represented the appellants and Mr.. Frank
Springer the appellees.
In the matter of the informatio on con-
corning Thomas B. Catron and Charles
A. Spless, the following modification of
the order of the court was asked:
Now come the said respondents in their
own proper persons, attended by counsel,
and move the court to modify the order
heretofore made herein, SO as to require
said committee heretofore appointed
Immediately to assemble at Santa Fe and
proceed with its labors, and to make
report at the earliest possible moment;
and also 30 to enlarge the powers of
said committee as to authorize it to make
investigation into the merits of the COM
plant filed herein, before preparing and
filing any charges therein, and to ex-
anime any records, persons and papers
which may be submitted.
The court declined to make the modi-
fication requested and the order stands as
originally made.
The case of the United States vs.. oseph
Routledge, charged with timber trespass,
was argued and submitted this forenoon.
District Attorney Hemingway repre-
sented the government and Gen. Bartlett
the defendant.