The Saint Paul globe., 1897-09-24
SHE SIGNED IT AWAY
CYTHERA A. STEES' STORY ABOUT
THE LOSS OF A PIECE OF
PROPERTY,
WHICH SHE NOW WANTS BACK
ACCUSES FRANCIS L. SCHRAM OF
UNLAWFULLY SECURING POS
SESSION OF 1T.
MAKES SENSATIONAL CHARGES.
Files an Action Asking the District
Court to Right the Alleged
Wrong.

In a suit brought in the district court
by Cythera A. Stees, wealthy proper
ty owner of the city, against Francis
L. Schram, she makes sensational
charges.
Plaintiff alleges that she is owner in
fee simple absolute of large quantity
of improved property in st. Paul,
among it being a large double dwelling
house on lot 1, in block l, Of Irvine's
addition, and that this property was
and now is encumbered by a mortgage
given by plaintiff to W. F. Peet to Sc
cure a promissory note, made on April
TO- 1891, and due in three years from
that date; that this mortgage is now
owned and held by Eva H. Lynch, who
is assignee thereof. Plaintiff affirms
that this property was and is valuable
and paying real estate and that plain
tiff had derived therefrOm through rem
tails large sums of money from time to
time
The petition recites further, that as
plaintiff was unacquainted with busi-
ness and unable to attend to the man
agement and renting of this property,
she employed defendant to take entire
(
property, and particularly the premises
in question; to rent it and make all
collections and repairs and to pay the
balance to the plaintiff.
From July "a, 1894, up to the present
time, plaintiff alleges, her agent has
collected for her large sums and also
paid money out; that on Sept. 1, 1896,
defendant abused the trust plaintiff
had reposed in him and 'Wrongfully,
unlawfully and fraudulently' stated
and represented to plaintiff that the
mortgage already referred to, being in
default, had been foreclosed by the
owner thereof and that the time for
the redemption of the property had eX
pired and that the property was no
longer owned by plaintiff; that her rev.
enue from the rentals had thus been
cut off and that 'all of said statements
were false and we'll known by plaintiff
to be false when he made them"
The complainant affirms that she be-
lieved defendants representations to
be true, and relying upon them, made
no effort to collect any rents from the
property or to require defendant to ac-
count for them. Defendant is alleged
to have continued in control of the
property and collected the rents with
out the knowledge or consent of
plaintiff, and that he has so contin-
ued to conduct affairs up to the pres
ent time; that the property had rent
ed for $45 per month at the time de-
fendant had made false and fraudu-
lent representations" that defendant
has refused to render an account to
plaintiff, and that he "fraudulently,
wrongfElly and unlawfully claims to
be entitled to said rents, and has ap-
propriated and collected the same to
his own use;" that plaintiff believes
the amount defendant has so convert
ed is $3.50.
While defendant was acting as her
agent plaintiff alleges that she signed
many papers and leases upon his
placements to her of their contents
without reading them; that on Sept. 1,
in question, and on several other oc-
casions thereafter, defendant wrong