The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-10-05
AN ESTATE OF LONG AGO
KRATZER HEIRS THINK MONTANA
PROPERTY WAS KEPT FROM THEM.
An Uncle Who Investigated-A Man
in indianapolis Is Stirring
Up the Matter.

According to a special from Logansport,
last night, there is under preparation there
unique suit regarding an estate which
seems to have entirely disappeared. The
special is as follows:
Judge Cox, of the Miami Circuit Court,
has under advisement the presentation and
argument in one of the most singular cases
that has come to legal notice in this State
for long time. involving an estate which.
apparently, disappeared utterly twenty
years ago and which is now in process OF
being discovered. The case has grown out
OF a claim made against the estate by Ed
ward Kratzer, of Waupecong, and others,
for large sum of money and interest. The
attorneys for the claimants. Mcconnell &
Jenkines of this city, and Reasoner *
O'Hara. Of Peru. set forth in their claim
in Montana. and that he left an estate val
ued at several thousand dollars. The de-
ceased was unmarried and his only legal
dead, who were then living in the southern
part of Miami county, and three brothers
and one sister, also of that county who
Louis Kratzer, now deceased: Edward
Kratzer and Mrs. Elizabeth Myers. Upon
receipt of the news of the death of Fred
erick Kratzer, in Montana, over twenty
two years ago, the heirs got together and.
understanding that their relative had left
an estate. it was agreed that John G:
KratZer, then In business in Peru, should
go to Montana and look after their inter-
ests in the estate and make the proper dis
tribution Of the proceeds on his return. On
his return home John c. Kratzer reported
that his brother died a poor man and there
was not even enough left of his small be-
longings to pay his funeral expenses. The
plaintiffs in this case claim that John C..
Kratzer repeatedly declared in the years
that followed and until his death about two
years ago. that he did not get cent. Some
OF the heirs believed that an estate of some
considerable value was left and that John
| c. Kratzer appropriated 1t to his own use,
notwithstanding his claims that he got
nothing. No steps were taken to investigate
| the matter during the life of John G.
| Kratzer. and 1t is understood that the pres
| ent suit is the result of an investigation
which was started several months ago by
| Fred Kratzer, of Indianapolis, the young
! est son of the late Louis Kratzer. of Wau-
pecong, who opened up correspondence
| with certain person in Montana and
learned enough to satisfy him that his uncle
| left an estate in that country, and that 1t
| passed into the hands of his deceased uncle,
| John G. Kratzer.
THE matter was placed in the hands of
| the attorneys already named and in Au-
gust Mr.. O'Hara went to Montana to make
| an investigation to ascertain whether or not
| the claim of his clients was just one.
While West. Mr.. O'Hara claims to have
left an estate and that he also found the
man who had settled the estate, who placed
before him documents showing that he paid
over to John c. Kratzer the sum of S. 37O
the late John c. Kratzer. filed his final re-
| port and settlement on the 18th day of Au-
gust. The foregoing claim was filed on the
same day. but about two hours before the
amended. The attorneys for the estate are
N. .. Ross, OF this city. and Bailey & Cole
| of Peru 1t is claimed by the attorneys for
| the estate that claim against an estate
must be filed at least thirty days before the
nnal settlement is made, otherwise it must
| be barred"