The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-06-18
HASKINS WILL DOUBTED.
The Relatives Of the Deceased
Charge That 1t Was
Forged.
Mrs. Haskins' Connection With the
Fair Pencil Will Brought
to Public Mind.

A contest was filed yesterday in the
Superior Court by the relatives of James
Haskins, alleging that the Photographic will
left by him, and submitted for probate, is
forgery. Haskins died August II, 1894,
and the will was filed five days later by his
widow.
Mrs. Elizabeth Haskins, the sole legatee
under the will, is the same Mrs. Haskins
about whose connection with the pencil
will in the Fair case there was built up
such mass of rumor and conjecture.
The contestants in the Haskins case are
the sister-in-law of the deceased, Sarah
Ann Haskins, and her two sons, James
William Haskins and George Haskins.
Haskins' will, as written by himself, is
as follows:
2202 LEAyENwoRTH STREET,
SAN FRANCISCO, August 6, 1881
This is to certify that l, James Haskins, in
my right mind, bequeath to my beloved wife,
Elizabeth Haskins all my real estate and per-
sonal property OF every description, and ap-
point her executrix without bonds. l owe
nothing but monthly contingent expenses.
JAMES HAsXINs.
This was formally signed James Haskins.
The estate, as set forth in Mrs. Haskins'
petition for the probate of the will, was
valued at about $4,000.
The will was written on single page OF
notepaper. At tho time of its filing no
particular objectionswas made as to its in
tegrity, but for some months past an in
creasing demand on the part of Haskins'
own relatives, and their attorneys, to see
and examine the writing and signatures
and compare them with old letters and
documents had suggested what rumor inn
mediately took up and circulated-that the
Haskins will was forged.
The substance of the prayer of the petit
TONERS is contained in the last paragraphs
OF the petition, as follows:
The petitioners further show and allege as
grounds for the contest of the probate OF the
said alleged will that said pretended will OF
the said James Haskins, deceased, so admitted
to probate as aforesaid, is not, nor is any part
thereof, the last will or any will whatever of
the said James Haskins, nor is the same,
nor was it ever, nor was the signature thereof,
witnessed or subscribed by any person what
ever, as witness thereto or otherwise. =
Wherefore your petitioners pray that the
order admitting said will to probate may be
vacated and set aside, and to that end that
citation be issued to the said Elizabeth
Haskins in accordance with law citing her as
in the law OF California provided, to appear
and answer this petition, and to show cause
why the said probate of said pretended will
should not be vacated and set aside, and that
petitioners may have such other and further
relief they are entitled to, the premises
considered
The attorneys in the Fair will case are
not willing to admit that the contest of the
Haskins will can or will have any bearing
upon the Fair case.
II cannot see any connection whatever
between the two cases." said Russell ] :.
Wilson last evening. Given should it be
proved that the Haskins will has been
forged, l do not see what effect
that can have on the Fair will.
There was great deal of talk
when the pencil will came out regarding
the fact that Mrs. Craven and Mrs. Has,
lklns, the two witnesses to the document.
llveo together, and that Mrs. Haskins was
very adroit with the pen, but the penciI
will is authenticated, and what bearing
this Haskins case may have upon it l do
not see.'' ~