The San Francisco call., 1895-05-21
part of the community property of said plain
tiffs, and not otherwise.

part of the community property of said plain
tifs, and not otherwise.
".
That on the said 3lst day of July. 1898, while
said 5000 shares of stock of said corporation
was in possession of said Claus Spreckels, and
while the same was possessed by the said Claus
Spreckels as community property OF sald
plaintiffs, and not otherwise, the said plaintiff,
Claus Spreckels, indorsed the said certificates
OF said stock in blank by writing thereon and
els, and thereupon and on said day last named
and in the said City and County of San
Francisco the said Rudolph Spreckels OBJ,
certificates of said stock and of the
whole thereof as pretended gift of the said
5000 shares of said stock and of the whole
and ever since has asserted and claimed and
does now assert and claim by virtue of said al
legged gift to be the owner thereof
V.
That said purported gift of said stock and
of the whole thereof from said Claus Spreckels
to said defendant was made without any con-
sideration, valuable or otherwise, and said de-
since the making Of said purported gift of
said stock, has ever at any time paid or rem.
dered or given unto said plaintiffs, or either OF
them, any consideration, valuable or other
wise, or any equivalent, or any other thing
whatever therefor.
That said plaintiff, Anna C. Spreckels, the
wife of said Claus Spreckels, as aforesaid, at
and prior to and since the said 31st day OF
July, 1898, has never at any time or In any
manner whatever, either in writing or other
wise, consented to the making OF said pur-
ported gift of said stock or any portion thereof,
or the conveyance thereof, or the transfer OF
the possession thereof or any part Thereon, 10
said defendant.
That at the time of the said purported gift of
said stock to said defendant and of the delivery
OF the possession of the aforesaid certificates of
the shares thereof to him the said stock was
yielding and the said corporation was paying
thereon monthly dividends in a large amount,
and from said 31st day of July, 1898, down to
the present time the said stock has continued
thereon said large amount of monthly
dividends. That ever since the 31st
has received Said large amount of dividends
monthly; that said plaintiffs are informed and
believe and therefore state that said monthly
dividends so paid to and received by said de-
fendant amounted to a sum of not less than
$4,000 per month, which said defendant has
during said period received, appropriated and
applied, and still does appropriate and apply,
10 his own use, and has never in any manner
accounted to said plaintiffs for said dividends,
nor paid the same, nor any portion thereof, TO
them or either OF them; but, on the contrary,
the said defendant has ever since said receipt
OF the possession of the said stock from said
Claus Spreckels on said 31st day of July, 1898,
claimed and asserted and pretended to be the
owner thereof, and has possessed and controlled
said stock as such owner thereof, and has ap-
propriated and still does appropriate the same,
and the said dividends and income thereof
to his own use and benefit, and claims the
right TO continue SO to do. That as said plain
tiffs are informed and believe, and therefore
state, the said defendant has hypothecated
large portions of said stock in amount un-
known 10 said plaintiffs to various persons,
and to secure obligations in large sums, the
amount of which is also unknown to said
plaintiffs, and said plaintiffs aver that unless
restrained by this court the said defendant
Will continue to take and receive and appro-
pirate to his own use and benefit the dividends
acccruing from said stock, and will further
incumber and hypothecate the same, and
thereby the said stock and the whole thereof
will become lost to said plaintiffs.
VIII.
That heretofore, on the 1Sih day of March,
1895, the said plaintiffs demanded of said de-
fendaIt the return TO them of said stock, and
of the whole thereof, and further demanded
from said defendant an accounting thereof,
and OF the profits income and dividends
thereof, but said defendant has at all times be-
fore and since said demand refused and neg
lected and still refuses and neglects TO return
said stock to said plaintiffs, or either of them,
or TO render any accounting whatever thereof,
or OF the said profits and dividends thereof
Wherefore said plaintiffs pray judgment
against SAID defendant herein, that said plain
uffs are the owners and are entitled to the pos
session of said stock and of the whole thereof
and that said defendant has no right or title or
and that said defendant be restrained from
further alternating, hypothecating or incum-
bering said stock or any portion thereof, and
from drawing or receiving. any of the profits
and dividends thereof, and that said defendant
be further directed and commanded by this
court to produce and surrender up and deliver
said stock to said plaintiffs, and that he do
further account to said plaintiffs for all the in
come and dividends heretofore received by
him from and upon said stock, and that he
pay over the same and the whole thereof TO
said plaintiffs as the community property of
said plaintiffs, and for such other and further
relief as may be meet in the premises and tor
all costs of suit DELMAs & SHoRTRIDGE,
Attorneys for plaintiffs.
The complaint was verified by Samuel
M. Shortridge, attorney for the plaintiff,
as the code provides in the absence of the
plaintiff from the State.
Judge Slack issued a preliminary in
junction as prayed for and John D. and
Adolph Spreckels qualified as sureties on
the accompanying bond in the sum OF
$25, 900.