The San Francisco call., 1896-09-20
when YOU first saw the will in Mr.. LIoyd's

when you first saw the will in Mr.. Lloyd's
office"
II Idecline to answer"
why"
"Well, it would interfere with certain
business matters"
What business matterS?"
"Well, have to look into certain mat
tiers relating TO these papers,"
'How look into them?n
"Well" said the witness, desperately,
81 am expected to pass upon the validity
of them"
'What was the opinion you had at that
timer"
That it looked very much like Senator
Fairs handwriting"
did you say SOP"
"I said It looked like Senator Fairs
writing. l made use of some other ex-
presSions, also"
What other expressions?"
Il said if 1t was forgery ii was very
clever one.'
What did you say about it to Miss
Craven in New York;"
AT this point Charles Heggerty entered
and promptly objected to the question
and advised the witness not to answer.
''Are you the same Richard Dey who
stated to reporter of The CALL what APP
pears in the issue OF that paper of March
90 1882" Here Mr.. Delmas read as fol-
lows from an interview with Mr.. Dey:
The handwriting of the will is most assur-
edly that OF the late Mr. Fair, and 1 don't
hesitate TO pronounce the will genuine in
every respect. l should be familiar with Sena-
tor Fairs handwriting if anybody is. 1 was
his secretary from, let me see; anyway, it was
in the SOS, until 1884. unders TODD him
thoroughly. We consulted together, dined to-
getner, travelled together. There is no doubt
in my mind but that the new document ex-
presses the manner in which the late Senator
wished to dispose of his estate. 1t was Just
like him WTlta this will. If his w
of doing things. He allowed these execu tors
of the first document filed TO think that they
| had everything their own way and then he
went off and upset the whole matter by making
another will. Nothing could be more charac-
teristic of the man.
Upon Mr.. Heggerty's advice the witness
| declined To answer.
did you have such an interview with a
! reporter Of. The CALLp'
Heggerty objected unless the name OF
| the reporter was given, that he might
( know to what he was expected to testify.
Delmas then went over the interview,
expression by expression, asking the wit
ness if he had said SO and so, at each oi
| which the same advice was given and the
witness declined to answer.
Then Delmas went over the same
| grounds, putting the questions direct as
/ whether the witness thought so and so as
expressed, and the witness under advice
still declined to answer them This effce-
tually stalled the progress of the deposit
ton and the notary was advised to report
the matter to court.
| W. Nj. Pierson, of Pierson & Mitchell
attorneys for the special administrators of
! the Fair estate, was then called. he
stated the firm of Pierson G. Mitchell, as
such attorneys. had in their possession
seven wills made by Senator Fair, count
ing the codicils. They were in their hands
as attorneys and they declined to produce
| them. Mr.. Mitchell made the same state
ment.
Mr.. Crothers of the special admins
traitors and trustees under the will was
then sworn and stated that the wills were
not and never had been in his possession.
They had been delivered to Mr.. Bresse as
an individual and he had turned them
over to their attorney.
This closed the inquiry of the day.