The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-07-20
DURElE HEIRS PETITION
Awrit Of Nasdanas Against See
rotary Gage Denied.


Justice Hagner yesterday refused to
grant the petition Of Leonard C. Biaisdell.
representing the heire Of Charles Durkee.
Gage. Secretary Of the Treasury, to COM
pei him to turn over to the claimants the
principal and interest of $6l, 623. 612 worth
OF certain bonds Of the Central Pacific and
Union Pacific Railway Companies, said to
be deposited in the vaults Of the Treasury
and alleged to be the property Of the
claimants. TheNpetition filed by Blaisdell
was very vague and offered little or no
testimony as to how or when the deceased,
Charles Durkee, came into possession OF
the bonds. and did not even suggest how
they found their way into the Treasury.
The petition, however, was not disposed
OF by Justice Hagner on these grounds.
The court held that the suit should have
been nled by the administrator Of the Dur
kee estate or some one or more Of the
heirs OF the deceased.
An interested auditor. at the hearing
was J. A. Kuykendall. Of Salt Lake City,
Utah. who is the administrator OF the
Durkee estate. This fact, however. was
not made known until Justice Hagner an
nounced his decision. Then It was that
Nj. Kuykendall made known his connec-
ton with the matter to District Attorney
Andersen and ventured the opinion that
the action Of the court was just and
proper.
Mr.. Kuykendall and friend, 7. J. Abel,
who is also interested in the settlement Of
the Durkee estate. are stopping at the
Proceedings In the court were concluded.
Neither Of them. however, was inclined to
give any Information about the matter
further than to say that they are satisfied
with the decision of Justice Hagner. Kuy-
kendall some four years ago filed q claim
for the same amount, $S4.623.512, on behalf
Of the Durkee heirs, in the Court Of
e Claims, but this suit was dismissed about
q month ago for want Of prosecution. When
asked about this Kuykendall stated that
he was aware that to successfully prose-
cute his claim 1t was necessary for him to
produce certain testimony. This he said
he could not do and consented to let the
suit be dismissed without prejudice to the
claimants. It Is also stated that Blaisdell
has Instituted proceedings in the Court Of
Claims for the recovery Of the amount al
legged to be due the Durkee heirs
1t was plain to be gathered from what
Kuykendall said that he is not very anx-
ious for the success OF Blaisdell in his suit.
He said that he believes that Blaisdell, as
attorney for many or all Of the Durkee
heirs. has already disposed OF all, or
nearly all, the interests Of his clients.
with their sanction. Even II this is SO,
Kuykendali is of the opinion that it will
not effect the value OF his claim should 1t
be granted by the Government.
The petition presented by Blaisdell ask
ing that q rule be issued by the Supreme
Court Of the District requiring Secretary
Gage to show cause why the principal and
Interest Of the bonds in question should
not be turned over to the claimants is q
voluminous document. The direct state
ment is made that the bonds in question
are In the vaults Of the Treasury, or, at |
least, were seen there in the year 1884 |
BY one Of the heirs Of Durkee, still there
Is not the slightest intimation as to how,
when, or by whom the valuable papers |
were deposited in the governmental strong
box.
1t is set forth in the petition concerning !
the bonds that they were acquired. by /
Charles Durkee, who died in 1870 1t was
explained by counsel for the petitioner
that at that time the bonds OF the Central
Pacific and Union Pacific Railway Com
panies were offered for sale at q very low
figure, and Durkee, who about that time
was Governor of Utah, and a man OF con-
adorable means. is supposed to have pur-
chased some of them. At what figure the:
bonds were purchased is not stated,
although 1t was said that at one time
they were offered on the market as low as
Is cents on the dollar.
According to the claim of the heirs. sirce
the time Of the death Of Durkee in 1870,
all trace Of the bonds was lost until by
accident they were seen In the vaults at
the Treasury by one of the claimants in
the year 1884. 1t is not explained how the
bonds seen at the Treasury were identi-
fed as the particular bonds supposed 20
have been purchased by and in the per-
session of Charles Durkee thirty years
ago. T.
In support of the petition the affidavit
Of John T. Devices, of this city, was f ed.
The afiant states that he was well ac-
Quainted with the deceased, Durkee, ard
had talked with him regarding his busi-
ness affairs. Durkee had informed him
that at one time he. together with man
named Kerr, had been engaged furnishing
the Union Pacific and Central Pacific rail-
way companies with cross-ties and that ,
they were paid for the ties in what were
known as construction bonds, or certii-
Gates" Durkee also stated to him a few ,
days before his death, Mr.. Devices says. !
hat he had a large amount of these bonds
On hand and that he had also deposited ,,
! large amount of them in some bank in | !,
New York which he (Durkee) did not :
name. -
Blaisdell was represented at the hearing .
BY Attorney Thomas J. Mackey, and the
Government by District Attorney Ander-
on. After Justice .Hagner announced his /.
lecfsion Mr.. Mackey stated that he would
'enew the suit in another form.
-----------
Ram AFFORDS RELIEF.
Il