The times., 1899-08-20

Mary Ellen Burke and her husband,
William E. Burke, through their attorney,
Thomas NJ. Fields, yesterday filed suit in
the Supreme Court of the District of CO.
lumbia against William NJ. Drury. Edmond
Fitzgerald, and John ]. Fegan, trustees,
and Nicholas H Shea, Treasurer of the
Enterprise Serial Building Association OF
this city, and fourteen other defendants.
to vacate a sale, on July z, 1883, OF the
property of the late Richard F. McQuillan,
located on the northwest corner OF Twen-
tieth and L Streets northwest, made by
Fitzgerald and Fegan, as trustees, under
two deeds of trust to secure the building
association. 1t is claimed that this sale
was made for grossly inadequate price
and fraudulent. The complainant,
Mary Z. Burke, asserts that she is the
sole heir of McQuilian and inherited the
property upon his death. She also says
that she kept house for him for many
years before his death, under a contract
with him that he would devise this prop
erty to her absolutely by will, but that he
died suddenly without leaving any will.
While there are relatives living who
would, if American citizens, be entitled
TO inherit before her, Sne claims that they
cannot inherit, because they and their an
cestors through whom they must trace
their inheritable blood to McQuillan are
and were aliens, and are, therefore, in
capable under the laws OF the District to
inherit from McQuillan, he having been
a natural born subject of the United States.
The property is said TO be Of the ord-
nary value of $4,000, and in excess of
this value, because of an old-establshed
saloon on the corner. Mr.. Drury. it is al
legged, bought the property on March 20,
1899, from John ]. Dolan, trustee under
decree of court, for $500, and was well
rOIEn nit h
closing his purchase, however, he asked
the court to relieve him from it for an al
legged defect of title in McQuillan's heir
The court relieved him, and Immediately
the building association trustees and treas
urer asked the court for leave TO sell un-
der their trusts, which leave was granted
1t is charged that before Drury asked to
be relieved the complainants offered to in
demnify him IL he would buy at the bui d.
Ing associations sale and be compelled to
bid more than 5000, but he refused
this offer. 1t is also ayerred that before
and at the time the building association
asked for leave to sell under its trusts the
conlplainants offered to pay them in full
upon assignments without recourse of their
secured bonds, but they refused this Of
fer
The compiainants also allege that only
S24.75 per month was required to keep
0OnA iAS ANO u h6l-, MDllS Sop.0u per
month was received as rentals from the
property and that the building associa-
ton entrapped them into allowing the
monthly payments TO fail in arrear,.in or
der that they might foreelose to benefit
Drury. II is also charged that the build
ing association and DruTyz zconspired to de-
fraud the heir by sale OF the property for
grossly inadequate price. and by sitting
competition and driving away prospective
- I@ IL, <.rr
spiracy, that the building association
trustees offered the property for sale on
July Z. 1899, and on the three bids all
made for Drury, sold it to him for only
$4,000, this being S3,200 less than he had
bought it for on March 20, 1899, about
three months before. The sale of July Z,
1899, is claimed to have been irregular and
unlawful in other respects, and allegations
are made that the rights of the heir were
wilifully ignored to enable Drury to get
the property. Drury is said to be a mem
Der of the building association.
1t is set forth that since the sale four
offers, ranging from 1000 cash TO S. 500,
have been made for the property, that only
about $50 was overdue under the trusts
that it was worth five times the amount of
the whole secured debt; that il was readily
capable of subdivision, and that one-fourth
OF 1t could have been easily laid off and
Soio Aoi SuiiSiSHt " pay llc ShAiiS eSSul Sd
debt with all costs and expenses of sale;
that the alleged sale was never reported TO
the court, and that the whole matter was
carried out covertly, hastily and in ac-
cordance with prearranged scheme to de-
fraud the heir.
1t is asked that the sale be vacated:
that the complainants be allowed to redeem
the property; that receiver be appointed;
that Drury be enjoined from conveying it
away and from interfering with it and its
tenants and rentals, pending suit, and that
the defendants be required to answer, but
not under oath.
The complainant, Mary Burke, (nee
O'Keefe) is the maternal first cousin OF
McQuillan, and lived with his family for
many years in one of the houses on the
property. McQuillan died on January Ia
fc.r., 1T Afer.,r aefa ma