The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-09-27
IT BEATS FICTION
Mrs. Abram's Case Again Proves the
Truth Of a Time Honored
Adage.
Her Relationship to the Late TRAMP
Millionaire" Revealed by the
Merest Chance.

Another claimant to the estate of
Charles Hill, or Salem Charles, as he was
sometimes known, the millionaire
tramp" who died intestate at Los An
geles, Cal, has appeared in the person Of
Mrs. James l.. Abrams, of 240O Irving ave-
nue. N, this city. r.
Mrs. Abrams sets up the claim to being
a daughter of Hills half brother, said to
be a Jacob Moon. She insists that she is
as close a blood relative to Hill as any
who have yet put themselves forward as
the legal heirs to the estate. She ac-
cordingly lays claim to the entire fortune
of $142,000 and has retained F. w. Reed,
906 New York Life building to look after
her interests ,.., r s.... ..
Mrs. Abrams explanation of her failure
to make known her relationship to Charles
Hill before this reads like the introduce
tory chapter to a novel of the 'lost and
found" type. Her father and mother, she
says, died when she was of such a tender
age as to retain no remembrance of
either. She was then adopted by family
who never revealed her identity to her,
beyond the knowledge that she was an
adopted child.
But for stroke of fortune and the
hand of fate" she explained to-day. II
never would have known Of my close con-
nection with the strange old man whose
fortune seems in fair way to be placed
at my disposal" ..- '.'-
It was by the merest chance that Mrs
Abrams learned Of her relationship tc
Hill. y,
A stranger passing through Minneapolis
| irl June last saw this head line in a local
paper: .-
| ; who Is Charles HIP"
| The stranger was one Harris N. Ban
croft, who neglected to give any one his
permanent address,. Mr.. Reed Is now en-
| ploying every means to locate that man
| If he can find him he Is confident thai
| Bancroft will be able to supply the miss
| ing links in the chain of evidence needed
| to fully substantiate Mrs. Abrams claim
| to the fortune. .
| Upon reading the article relating to Hill
Bancroft penned letter to the public ad-
| ministrator Of Los Angeles, telling Wha
| he knew about the lonely old man, who
had put his money in safety deposit
vault, only to die few days later muir
| 1nuring:
mo one in this world knows me; NJ
one cares for me-" i.
| Bancroft informed the administrator
that he was a distant relative Of the de-
| ceased. His cousin, he explained, hac
married a second cousin Of Hill In Ken
lucky in 1859. :.
'Hill," wrote Bancroft, twas born If
| Virginia and was Is or rs years old at the
time ofshis death. His father died whe1
| he was two years OLD. Ills mOt1leI 1i1dl
ried man named Moon and another boy
was born two years afterWard we wen
to school together near Richmond. Whe1
| the bows were aged Is and 20 years re-
spectively, their mother died. The
father did not long survive her. leaving
the boys about $4,000, over the d1Vlslo1
| Of which they quarreled.
Jacob Moon left Richmond and mar
tried a, Miss Catherine Elizabeth Watson II
| Kentucky They returned to Richmond
where three children-two girls and a DO!
| were born.
| 1.-THE boy died within year. The!
moved to Minnesota in 1857. Moon com
menced to drink heavily in Minnesota, am
finally left for the west, going first t.
| Pixies Peake. He never returned. Hi
wife has been dead since 1851 and onl!
! one Of his children is alive-Mrs. Jane
I l.. Abrams, of Minneapolis She has al
uncle William H: watson of Wisconsin
Moon afterward changed his name t
Charles Hill. met him two years ago II
! California"
The William H. Watson referred to live
/ at Eau Claire, Wis. He is also interested
in the division of the fortune.
i Public Administrator Moss, Of Los An
I gees. has informed Mrs. Abrams he Is sat
i isfed she is not one of the heirs to tn
fortune, but she has not yet despa1red o
being able to prove her claim.
Another Minneapolis claimant to tn
| fortune, whose case was referred 70
/ The Journ a two weeks ago IS MRS
Nereus NJ. Cook, wife OF Dr. N. M. Cooh
1924 Minnehaha avenue.
Both claims are widely divergent = Tn
i one is so irreconcilable with the othe
that after consulting both the only conclu
| sion to be reached is that there must nav
| been two Charles Hills.