The San Francisco call., 1896-09-27
What They Would Prove About
Campbell's Valuable Ap-
pointment.
BE PREFERRED NOT TO FIGHT.
Question of Campbell Being overpaid
Put Of Till Final Distribution
of the Estate.

mine the right of the German heirs to in
troduce testimony in support of their
petition for the revocation of an order
made in 1890 under which James II.
Campbell of San Jose, as attorney for the
absent heirs, was to receive $1,000 month,
and especially to prevent the payment of
$40, 500, claimed by Mr.. Campbell to have
accrued under the order, during the ten
and a half months that proceedings for
the removal of Jesse Sheldon Potter, as
the executor, were under way.
This is the matter in which sensational
charges of fraud upon the part OF various
officers of the court were published re-
Gently. That publication resulted in the
appointment by Governor Budd of Judge
Belcher of this City as special Judge to de-
termine the rights of the German heirs
under their petition.
When Judge Belcher called the matter
there were present Messrs. William B.
Treadwell and George c. Ross represent
ing the executor of the estate; William
Rix of the firm of Bishop & Wheeler, who
are the attorneys Tor the representatives.
of the estate of the deceased wife of
Charles Lux; James II. Campbell of San
Jose, the respondent IN the proceedings,
and his attorney, J. G. Campbell; Henry
Lux. G. G. II. MacBride and Major Pott,
".
NJ. Delmas, and Mr.. Britain of his office.
After some preliminary fencing Mr..
Delmas, on the part OF the petitioners,
offered to prove certain facts. He said in
effect:
''The petitioners in this case offer to
prove the following facts: That Charles
Lux died in the county of San Mateo, ir
this State, in the month of March, Is 81,
being at the time of his death partner in
the partnership of Miller & Lux. He left
will, which was duly probated In the
Superior Court of the county of San Ma
teo in April, 1887. The will provided gen.
orally that one-haH OF the estate should
go to the widow of the decedent and the
other half 10 his brothers and sisters or
their issue.
IAN inventory and appraisement of the
estate was duly returned in said court in
the month Of August, 1885, in which the
whole estate was appraised at less than
$1,000 900. This inventory has never been
challenged or modified.
"On January s, 1888, Henry Lux, one of
the petitioners herein, was the attorney in
TACT OF all the collateral heirs and devisees
OF the deceased, except mis- own three chill
dren, Charles, Lena and Lizzie Lux.
''Of the brothers and sisters of the de-
ceased, to whom half of the estate was
devised, there were fve one of whom was
Henry Lux.
Acting as the attorney in fact of these
the German heirs, and in his own behalf
on the Sth day of January, 1888, he entered
into a contract with the respondent,
James II. Campbell, which provided that
said James h. Campbell would faithfully
and diligently represent and act for the
other parties to it as their legal attorney
and adviser, to the exclusion when neces-
sarY of all other legal business throughout
the administration of the estate; and that
he would endeavor to hasten by all lawful
and proper means the close of the admin
istratIon of said estate and do all other
acts and things during said administra-
ton which might be deemed of benefit to
their interests in the estate.
I'm consideration of his promises thew
assigned to him per cent of their inter-
ests and shares in the estate, provided,
however, that should he violate or break
or disregard any of his covenants, or ne
glect to discharge and fulfill his duties
and obligations in good faith the agree
ment might Immediately be rescinded,
and that be should cease to be their attor-
ney and should at once release to them all
DEMENT'S to be derived by him under the
terms Of the agreement, 1t was further
agreed that he should bear his own travel
ing and other personal expenses in the
performance of mis- duties.
Under the terms of the agreement, in
the early part OF the year 1890 and be fore
the 1st of July of that year. the respond
ent received per cent of partial distri-
button OF the estate of decedent which
had been made to his clients, the German
heirs, which per cent amounted to the
sum Of SIC, 800. Thereafter. to wit, on July
IA, 1890 the agreement was rescinded by
mutual consent of the parties and another
agreement was substituted in lieu thereof
which provided that in consideration of
the reconveyanoe and agreement therein
contained and of the services already and
TO be rendered by James II. Campbell, the
knT-- .. 4.
ded interest in all OF the property of the
deceased equal to hree-hundredths of the
shares and interests devised to them by
the viii of the decedent.
In consideration of the foregoing grant
he reconveyed TO them all interest in the
estate under the agreement dated Janu-
ary 8, 1888, which was thereby annulled.
1t was agreed that whatever compensation
should be allowed TO him by the Superior
Court OF the County of San Mateo as at
torney for absent heirs shall be first ap-
piled 10y him to reimburse him for all out
lays made by him in rendering his SER
vices to the parties of the first part, and
the balance shall be credited to the par
ties OF the first part in the final settle.
ment. 1t IS fully understood that the
com pensatlon herein provided for shall
EN- brace all services rendered in the ad
ministration of said estate by the party of
the second part up to and including the
final distribution thereof
"0n the 2Ist day of July, 1890, an order
was made by the Superior Court of San
Mateo County, which decided that. in
view of the magnitude of the estate and
the arduous duties o. the attorney for the
absent heirs, it was deemed proper, and
the court therefore ordered that the re-
spondent be allowed out of the estate to
be paid by the administrators and
charged TO the German heirs, the monthly
sum OF $1,000, and that he be so paid the
sum of $50. ZOO for the two and half
years he had been acting as the attorney
for the absent heirs.
That the whole of the expenses OF the
respondent in rendering his services under
either OF said agreements, or under the
order, or in any manner, does not amount
to $500.
THAT the value of the estate does not at
the present time, and has not for the last