The San Francisco call., 1896-12-31
Administrators Also Have
Their Demands
Slashed.
Claimants Are Awarded $22,5oo
Each Instead of $43375
Each.
McEnerney, Mitchell, Pierson, Good.
fellow and Angus Feel the Courts
Pruning Knife.

In the estate of James G. Fair, deceased,
Judge Slack yesterday handed down an
opinion in the matter of the application
by the special administrators for compen-
sation for themselves and for their attor-
neys.
They are allowed $25O0 each for addi-
tional compensation, instead OF $23, 375
each for such compensation.
1t will be remem bered that about two
weeks ago the special administrators and
their attorneys requested Judge Slack, be-
fore whom the Fair estate litigation is
heard, to fix the amount of their compen-
sation. The facts involved in the matter
are fully presented in the courts opinion,
of which the following is the full text:
The matter OF fixing the compensation of
the special administrators and of determining
the allowance 10 be made to them for the fees
of their sttorneys was reserved for future con-
sideration when the final accounts of the spe-
cial administrators were in other respects set
tied. The special administration, through no
fault of the administrators, has lasted from Jan
nary 2, 1895, to November 16, 1896, q period
of twenty-five and a half months Louis c.
Bresse. one of the four persons appointed ad-
ministrators, died on April %, 1896, since
which time the three surviving administra-
tors have managed the estate. The estimated
value Of the real property, bonds, stocks and
other assets, exclusive of the cash on hand,
amounting to $4S1, 3s6 SO. is $1250O000
The sum of $4 ,633 455 80 in cash has passed
through the hands of the administrators, thus
making as the total value OF the estate admin
istered upon the sum of SIT, ,133, ,455 80. II
the statutory commissions OF executors and
administrators are to be taken as the standard
for ascertaining the allowance to be made TO
the special administrators, as is held Tin estate
o Moore, SO Cal, u they may be taken in a
proper case, the total compensation of the ad-
ministrators would be $173.500, or, including
Mr.. Bresse, $43. .S75 apiece 1t has been sug-
gested that this sum would not be an unrea-
sonable allowance under the circumstances,
and that each of the three attorneys-Mr.
Pierson, Mr.. Mitchell and Mr.. McEnerney-
should receive the sum of $43, ,375-~the
sum received by each of the administrators-cr
a total of $3.50, ,125.
According to this method of computation
$303625, or about $4,000 per month, would
be the compensation OF the administrators and
the attorneys.
Each of the three surviving illustrators
has already received $50. 900, Mt. Bresse
SIS O0O Messrs. Pierson & Mitchell SIC, 900
and Mr.. McEnerney $4,000, or a total of
additional amounts asked for are startling in
their proportions, and so at variance with my
ideas as to what ought to be allowed that
have thought il advisable to express my views
in writing in order that incorrect impressions
about my conception Of the worth of the
services rendered may be avoided on the one
side, and in order that the awards to be made
may be justified on the other.
No more vexed duty is imposed upon the
court than that of fixing the compensation of
attorneys in estates in probate, and the same
is to be said in determining the compensation
of special illustrators, there being in
neither instance any definite measure of
values. 1t is not an easy thing to be just to
the claimants as well as to the estate, and the
court is frequently not fortunate enough to
satisfy both claimants and distr ibutors. Even
when all parties concerned agree, the court is
compelled TO be cautious in the approval of
the agreement lest its action be attempted to
be construed into mischievous precedent for
other cases not similarly eireumstanced, and
lest a misunderstanding OF the conditions
under which the allowance was made should
subject the court to the criticism of being ex-
travagant. In the absence OF an agreement,
the observation CT an eminent jurist in Freese
VS.. Pennie (110 CAL, 467, 471) should be re-
membered:
"Courts have no right to be liberal with the
money OF other people, and should be careful
that fees allowed Tor trust estates are no larger
than would be paid for like services by those
who are competent to contract fcr them
Selves
have given the matter in hand much care
full consideration, with feeling of anxious
ness to do justice to both the claimants and the
estate, and have reached my conclusions after
mature deliberation.
The services of the administrators have been
varied and exacting. They have conducted a
vast business. including ranching, hotel-keep-
ing, selling, renting and improving city real
estate, purchasing and disposng OF personal
property, managing CORPORATIONS and collect
ing rents, interest and dividends, all as early
according to the policy of the deceased in his
lifetime as could be- Their transactions have
ranged from purchases and sales for few
cents up to sales and payments of debts for
millions of dollars. Every cent received and
expended by them has been accounted for
with scrupulous exactness. The estate is
practically out of debt, and has largely in
creased in value since the death of the de-
ceased.
!. Messrs. Angus and Bresse were truste en-
ployes of the deceased and thoroughly familiar
with his affairs in all of their details. Mr.
Goodfellow was the attorney of the deceased
and was conversant with his larger business
transactions requiring legal advice. They,
with Mr. Crothers, a nephew, were nominated
by the deceased in his viii as his executors.
Messrs Angus and Crothers have devoted
their entire time to the estate, as also did Mr..
Bresse up to the date OF his death.
Mr.. Goodfellows time has in part been de-