The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-07-09

for the probate of this will and they are q unit
in their Judgment that it is genuine. The
girls recognize the handwriting and the sigma
lures end have no hesltancy IN declaring II
genuine Fair wrote frequently with pencil.
We have compared this will with no end OF
his handwriting and the resent lance is
throughout. The will bears inherent evidence
of its genuineness, even If the proof OF its ex-
istence and signing were notso overwhelming.
We have felt right along that later viii,
written by the Senator himself, was IN exist
ence but we did not know in whose custody 1t
had been left and feared that it might be In
the vault in the Fair building.
George A. Knight said:
The accusation that the will is a forgery is
absurd. It's history is little peculiar, but no
one should think for moment that reputable
attorneys would introduce 1t into court until
they had become thoroughly convinced that 1t
was genuine. The names OF the attorneys
fathering the will ought to have considerable
weight. CARRIER Boalt & Bishop, Lloyd d
Wood, Wilson &, Wilson and my partner, Mr..
Heggerty, and myself would never sanction a
forgery. We Investigated il thoroughly before
we became satisfied that 1t was genuine, and
We feel confident that IL IS
Richard Dey, who was Senator Fairs
private secretary for many years, was con-
ident that the will of September "a was
gendene. In an interview published IN
THE CALL on March 90 1895, he said:
The handwriting OF the will is most as
suredly that of the late Mr.. Fair.
and 1 don't hesitate TO pronounce the will
genuine in every respect Ishould be familiar
with Senator Fairs handwriting II anybody is.
was his secretary from, let me see; anyway,
il was in the SOS, until 1884. understood
him thoroughly. We consulted together,
dined together, Travelled together.
There is no doubt in my mind but that the
new document expresses the manner in which
the late Senator wished to dispose of his
estate. 1t was just like him to write this new
will. 1t was his way of doing things. He al
lowed these executors kthe executors of the
first will fled TO think that they had every,
thing their own way and then he went off and
upset the whole matter by writing another
win. Nothing could be more characteristic OF
the man.
Charles l.. Fair said:
think 1 ought To know my fathers hand
writing. And this talk about the Will being a
forgery is absurd.
Governor Budd, who is also an attorney
for Charles Fair being interviewed SAID ne
had thorough confidence in the anthem
ITCHY of the will and secuted the idea of
it being a forgery. He has not in any pub
lie utterance shown any disposition to this
day to do so.
After the will of September "a hao
been presented to the court as before
stated its probate was contested by some
of.the collateral relatives and by young
Herman Oelrichs by Van r. Paterson,
their attorney, appointed by the
court. This contest was upon the grounds
that the instrument was not the last will
of James G. Fair, and that it was a for
gerry. To this contest Charles L. Fair,
Theresa A. Oelrichs and Virginia Fair an
swered on April 20. 1895. The answer
was as follows:
These defendants deny that the said will,
dated September "A, 1894 is not the last will
or any Will of James Fair, and deny that the
said will, dated the oath day of September,
1894, was not or that any part OF IL was not
written by the said James G. Fair, or
that it was never signed or dated by
him or by him executed in any manner
whatever, but on the contrary these defendants
avertthat the said will, dated the oath day of
September, 1894, is the last will and testament
OF said James G. Fair, deceased, and that the
executed by him, and was SO written, dated,
signed and executed by him as and for his
last will.
Defendants deny that the said James G. Fair
did not make, sign, publish and declare said
writing, dated September "a, 1894, to be his
last will, but Oh the contrary these defendants
aver that the said James G. Fair made signed
oath day of September, 1894, to be his last
will, and that said writing was by him in
tended so to be.
This answer was signed by Knight &
Heggerty, attorneys for Defendant Charles
L. Fair; Lloyd & Wood, attorneys for De-
PENDANTS Theresa A. Oelrichs and Virginia
Fair, and bv CARRIER, Boalt & Bishop and
Wilson & Wilson of counsel.
So, as stated, il will be an interesting
hour or more, in which all these gentle
men try TO reconcile these statements with
their present position in opposition to the
pencil will and their declarations that the
will and the deeds are forgeries.