Amador ledger., 1903-12-11
History of the Frates Case.

Believing that the history of the
F'rates case, now before the superior
court of the county, will be of interest
to many of our readers, we have gleam-
ed the following facts in relation there
to:
Frank Frates died October 81, 1903,
at lone, leaving as his sole heirs at law
five minor children, the eldest 10 years
of age, and the youngest 5years of age
He left no will, and none of the chill
dren were entitled to administer upon
their fathers estate, because they are
minors, and neither were any relatives
of the deceased entitled, because they
were not entitled to inherit any of the
personal estate.
On Nov. 5th, w. A. Bennetts of lone,
close friend of the family, and one of
the most reputable citizens of lone,
against whose character and ability not
Il word can be said, was appointed
guardian of the eldest child, upon the
nomination of the child and the
written request of their grand mother,
with whom the children live, and all of
their relatives in Amador county.
thereafter Bennetts as guardian ap-
piled for letteEs of administration, he
baving heretofore been appointed
special administrator. The law ex-
pressly provides that a, guardian of
minor is a person entitled to letters of
administration. After a few days,
George Huberty, public administrators
filed an opposition petition asking for
letters
The matter was heard Nov 90, and
submitted, and on Tuesday the court
appointed Huberty.
On Dec. 9th Fred L. Stewart pre-
sented the final accounts of W. A. Ben
netts, as special administrator and
guardian of Frank e. Frates, which
were settled and allowed w. A. Ben
netts resigned as guardian, and was
discharged. The notice of appeal al
ready filed in behalf of the guardian
was withdrawn, and all matters in dis
pute have evidently been settled be-
tween the parties. The hearing on the
application of Laura K Mullen for let
ters OF guardianship of the other minor
children, was continued. It is Under
stood that the application will be
| amended so as to include Frank E..
Frates, thereby embracing all the chill
dren of deceased. In that shape the
matter will be heard in "a few days.
1t may be mentioned that the wife of
deceased and mother of the children
died about one year ago. At the time
of her death there was, and still is on
record in Alameda county, deed Of
gift to her from her husband of certain
properties in that county; in Monterey
county there is also recorded deed
from the seller to her of lot in Pacific
| Grove; in the city and county of San
Francisco there is q recorded deed to
her from the seller of a lot on Lott.
street, and also recorded deed from
the seller to her and her husband of a
lot on Clayton street.
The records of this county show that
| alter her death a Judgment was rem
dered by the judge of the superior
court of Amador county in suit en-
titled Frank Frates, plaintiff. versus J.
w. Caldwell, administrator of the
estate of Mary Frates, deceased, de-
fendant, decreeing that Mary Frates
or her estate had no interest in the
| above mentioned properties, but that
Frank Frates, her husband, was the
owner thereof, and ordered the admin
| istrator of her estate to make deeds of
| recOnveyance back to Frates.
Just before Frates died he had con-
tracted to sell one of the city lots; the
buyer applied to the California Title
Insurance co. of San Francisco for an
abstract and insurance. The above
proceedings were examined, and the
company refused to pass the title, on
the ground, so we are informed, that
the suit was not such suit as could be
brought against an administrator, and
if it was, that the superior court of
Amador county had no jurisdiction of
the subject matter under the state
constitution.