Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1897-05-07
CHARGES BY HEIRS FALL FLAT.
COURT DECLARES NO CORRUPTION
WHATEVER WAS PROVED.
legations Affecting the InteS-
rity of Executors Fall
Decision in
Full.

the late Hiram NJ NOrtnrup, banker, TO
remove the executors, X. l.. Browne and
+. II. Lovelace.
Judge Herr refused to remove the ex-
ecutors. Owing to the extremely sem
sational allegations made in the petition of
the heirs the final determination of the
case has been watched with much interest.
The decision Of Judge Herr clearly vindi-
Gates the executors and the costs of the
litigation are taxed against the petitioners.
Since the death of Banker Northrup his
large estate has been the foundation for
much litigation. Application for the re-
moval of the executors and the appoint
ment of 4 receiver was first filed with
Judge Holt of the common pleas court.
Judge Holt decided that he had no juris-
diction in the matter holding that it was
an action that rightfully belonged to the
probate court.
The attorneys for the heirs then filed an
amended petition in the probate court, and
last month it was heard. The trial of the
case was of eight days duration.
The attorneys for the heirs stated last
night that they would carry the case to
the supreme court Judge Hers decision
complete is as follows:
In the probate court of Wyandotte county,
Kas. In the matter of the estate Of
Hiram NJ. Northrup. deceased. In the
matter of the application for the remov-
al of X. l.. Browne and E. II. Lovelace,
as executors of the last will and testa-
men ment of Hiram NJ. Northrup, deceased. :.
This is an application for the removal of
X. l.. Browne and f. H. Lovelace as eX-
eGrtors of the last will and testament of
H. NJ. Northrup: deceased. and is based
GEon section 2S0I of the general statutes
of Kansas, 1889. The application is made,
as shown by the petition filed. by all of
the heirs of the deceased, except one, none
of the creditors of said estate joining in
sad petition.
In passing on this petition and the proof
offered to sustain the same the court is
this case and for this reason permitted the
petitioners to make a full and complete in
vestigation. and no doubt in many in
starces followed no law or precedent as to
what might or might not have been COM
petent evidence, and this the court per-
mitted for the additional reason that the
sational charges and allegations. to some
extent almost libelous-as has been said
by one of the courts before whom this case
was presented 1.-The charges were enough
to shock the dignity of any court"
For the above reasons great latitude was
given to petitioners in trying this case. For
eight days the court has been engaged in
TIE trial thereof and equally as much time
has been devoted by the court in exarnin
ing the evidence which has been trans
scribed and filed with the court and for the
petition and the proof offered TO sustain
the same, the court has seen proper to
take up each separate allegation and pass
upon the same. some of them which re-
main wholly unproven and most of which
no pretense of proving was made, while
others were matters of record. most of
which. We're admitted. but which had no
bearing upon the questions involved. which
now seem to have dwindled to two ques-
tionS:
First-"That the executors are evidently
unsuitable
Second-..That the estate is not being ad-
ministered for the advantage of the real
tics IN it1fH
The matters and things complained of by
the petitioners cover period of time OF
about three years. and during time prior
to the date when this judge of this court
became probate judge: consequently all
matters pertaining to this estate and the
history of the same was unknown to this
court. thereby giving the court additional
trouble in becoming familiar with the same.
The statute under which this application
Is brought is as follows:
Section 2S07. When any executor or ad-
ministrator shall, after being duly notified
by party in interest or cited by the court,
neglect to render his accounts and to settle
said estate according TO law: or when any
executor or administrator shall become in
sane or otherwise incapable of discharging
or when the court Shall be satisfied that
such estate Is not being administered for
the advantage of the real parties in in
terest. or that any executor or adminis-
traitor has or is abusing his trust in any re-
spect, 1t shall be the duty of the court. up
on due hearing therefor had, to remove
No complaint is made that these ex-
ecutors have neglected to render their ac-
counts: on the contrary, the records in this
office show that annually, as is provided by
law, said executors have fulfilled this trust
The real parties in interest in this case
are the heirs and legatees of said estate
and the creditors thereof Uhere being
about 100000 worth of debts due to cred
itors of said estatel and In the opinion of
the court the creditors interest is para
deEiSeeS
the will of the testator,' and with this view
of the case the court must consider their
heirs in passing upon this petition 20 re-
move said executors. and If they are evil
IDENTIFY unsuitable persons. or the estate is
not being administered for the advantage
of the real parties in interest, then they
shall be removed and the court will not
hesitate to do so. but before exercising this
right the sensational charges made in this
petition based on the section of the statute
above referred to must be proven, as the
court is very loath to injure the executors
by removing them unless the allegations
are proven. The mere statements of at
torneys, however sensational. embodied in
a petition. are not in the opinion of the
court sufficient to cast suspicion on the
executors to such an extent that the court
can find the same to be of any merit unless
such allegations be substantiated by proof
of some nature tending to the truthfulness
of the same and unless proven or attempt
ed to be proven, such allegations should
have no influence on the court.
In this case the petition charges:
"FirSt-That for many years prior to his
death H. NJ. Northrup was unable by rea-
son of mental and bodily infirmities to at
tend to or manage the affairs of the North
rup Banking Company; that Browne had
managed the affairs up to the time OF its
failure
No evidence was offered to sustain the
first part of the above allegation and moth
ing was shown by which the court could
say (even II the same amounted to ANY,
thing in this case) that the deceased was
not able, through and by the assistance
of the officers in said bank, to attend to
the affairs thereof. and also his private
business.
The latter charge is proven and in the
mind of the court II was shown that Mr.
Browne was a faithful, honest and trusted
but it was in no manner proven that Mr..
Browne before or since the death of H. NJ
Northrup had In any manner abused this
Second.''That Browne and LoveIace
wrongfully procured an order appointing a
receiver of the Northrup Banking Com
pany."
No attempt was made to prove this al
legation and this fact simply stands as an
allegation, unsupported by direct or in
Third-"That Loveiace is the owner of
81 600 worth of stock in the Northrup Bank
ing Company and Browne is the owner of
$4,000 worth of stock of which only 5000
The evidence offered in this case shows
that Lovelace owns S1,oO0 and Browne $12-
600 worth Of stock o. & In said aid hank and that all
Fourth-.'That Browne and Lovelace cor
ruptly and Intentionally diverted assets of
the Northrup. estate. into assets of the
Northrup bank In order to avoid their liza
bility.'
even any pretense thereof nor was there
even any suspicion of fraud shown
The proof in reference to this allegation
which was by the records shown, that the