The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-04-05
LEGAL CONTEST
FOR A FORTUNE
Famous Murdoch Case
Comes to a Trial.
Special Dispatch to The Call.

WILLOWS, April 4.-The celebrated
Murdoch case came up for trial this
afternoon and the work of empaneling
the jury began. Only three talesmen
were examined, but no jurors were
sworn. At least a week viii be con-
sumed in getting jury. The courtroom
was crowded, many women being
present.
William Murdoch wealthy rancher of
Glenn County, residing near WILLOWS,
died about the Sth day of January, 1894.
He was unmarried. and left an estate val
ued at upward of $500 900. After the pro-
bate of his estate was commenced a claim
was presented by Mary Helen Murdoch,
wife of one of the large ranch owners in
amount of interest. The claim was based
on a promissory note for 500 900, dated
September 5, 1877, payable twenty years
after date and bearing interest at per
cent a month, and purporting to have
been signed by William Murdoch. The
note was as follows:
Sl00 600 OLI8iPO, Sept. 5, 1877.
Twenty years after date l promise to pay TO
the order of Mary Helen Murdoch the sum of
one hundred thousand dollars G1O0, o0O) with in
terest at the rate of ! per cent per month until
paid, principal and interest payable in United
States gold coin. WILLIAM MURDOCH.
The attorneys representing the estate
were loud in their denunciatiOn of the
note, and attempts We're made to show by
that William Murdoch never signed the
note nor had any occasion to sign a note
for that amount. The executors, strange
~ enough, while protesting that the note
was not genuine, never acted on the
claim, alleging in the papers filed that
they did not do so because they did not
know whether 1t was genuine or not They
have never up to this time eithar rejected
or allowed the claim. 1t was currently
reported at that time that one of the
executors had remarked that the note
was genuine and had Bill Murdoch lived
a week longer it would have been settled"
When the executors failed to act on the
claim suit was begun by the claimant to
establish the validity Of the note. 1t was
found that the action was prematurely
brought so it was dismissed. Immediate
ly after the note became due the present
suit was commenced in accordance with
the probate law, which provided that
suits upon claims not due when presented
must be commenced within two months
after the claim becomes due. The note
fell due on September 5. 1897.
Up to this time no word had come from
the claimant regarding the history of the
note, she biding her time apparently until
she had her day in court. But during the
course of the litigation the executors
took Mrs. Murdock's deposition and the
real consideration OF the note was made
public for the first time.
1t appeared from the deposition that
Sam Murdoch was the father Of Gavin
Murdoch, husband of the plaintiff. They
had two small children. Sam was a
cousin of William Murdoch, the deceased
Away back in 1861 Sam was engaged in
the sheep business with his son, GAVIN
and they had thousands of sheep running
on Government land. From these sheep
and their wool. which brought high prices
in those days GAVIN and his father
cleared large profits annually. William
Murdoch also at that time was in the
sheep business, and besides was buying
and taking up Government land. Samuel
had absolute confidence in Williams in
tegrity, often remarking that bill was
better than any bank" Year by year he
turned his surplus savings. together with
some thousands of dollars he received
from the estate of his father, John Muir
keeping This course was strongly OPP