The Birmingham age-herald., 1905-03-27
NOVEL SUIT IS UP IN ATLANTA COURT Heirs of Gov Joseph E. Brown
 Can't Agree THEY DO NOT SPEAK Decision of Georgia Judge is Blow to Pool PIayers-Terrell VIII
 Send Team to Sea
 Girt.
THEY DO NOT SPEAK

Atlanta, March 26-(SpeciaL)-N suit involving the final disposition of an es- tate and consequent family dispute has attracted more widespread attention than that between the heirs of the late Sem ator and war Governor Joseph E. Brown. the preliminary hearing in which will be had before the ordinary Judge John R. Wilkinson on Monday, March 27. By agreement between the attorneys the hearing has been set for that date and 1t is expected it will occupy several days. All of the parties to this suit are the children of Governor Brown, and there are arrayed on one side George M Brown, Elijah A. Brown, Miss Sally F. Brown and Mrs. b. L. Connally, who filed their petition against the executors, and on the other the two surviving executors. Julius L. Brown and Joseph M. Brown. whom the petition seeks either to remove or to require to give bond as a guarantee that they will carry out the provisions of the will
 Up to the time of her death in 1897 the wife of the late war governor wal one of the executors of the estate which is
 
 Now the management of the estate is wholly In the hands of the two named Julius l.. and Joseph Nj. Brown.
 Up to year ago the children and heirs of Governor Brown were on the best of brotherly and sisterly terms, visiting each other frequently, now they are compara- tive strangers.
 The principal charge which is brought against the two executors in this peti- tion is mi5management of the estate, and throughout the long document there are cited specific facts and circumstances with a view to upholding the main charge. 1t Is alleged that the executors have failed to secure tenants for the central property in Atlanta, which Is the most valuable portion of the estate. To this the executors answer that they have used every legitimate means wi..4in their power to secure tenants for all of the property but owing to the location of some of it, and to other caures they have been unable to get them Some of the property is rented, but 1t IS claimed that whereas 1t has an annual rental value of S27000. the receipts are only about Sl5,OOO. which is but little more than enough to pay taxes insurance and repairs. It Is charged that the executors have failed to make an accounting, to which the executors reply they were specifically relieved from this by paper signed by the heirs, which paper they exhibit Nevertheless the vouchers, they say, have always been open to inspection. It Is claimed the executors should have in their possession s9OOO0, and that they have not accounted for this sum, to which 1t is replied there is not and has not beer any such sum unaccounted for or undis- t.fl. ..l.. ,f 1.g tfsntsu This seems to have been the sum which might have been realized had the estate brought it's full rental value. Another ground of complain relates to the divis- ion of certain property in Texas, over which there was dispute between the four heirs bringing the suit and the exc cutors. This disput, the executors say arose out of the fact that George Brown did not get the parcel of Texas property which he wanted.
 The executors assert that they have complied with the terms of the will in every particular, and that since they have had charge of the estate they have dis tributed in dividends among the heirs about sl60,000 in cash and more than as much again in real estate and other prop erty.
 But the most interesting feature of the petition perhaps, is the charge brought Dy the LOuI cOihPldihiib htiio oA NhN Sois7 stant use of liquors and habitual intoxica- ton on the part of one of the executors. Julius l.. Brown, and the reply which MT. Brown makes to it. The object of this 1t seems, Is to strengthen the charge of mismanagement of the estate.
 The four heirs In question declare that they have frequently brought this matter to the attention of Joseph M. Brown, the other exccutor, who is sober man, and that his only reply is the naive remark that Julius drunk, has more sense than petitioners sober"
 In reply to the charge of drinking, Ju- Illus L. Brown admits in his answer that he is a drinking man, and says he be- lieyes that his life has been saved and prolonged by the use of whisky His father, he says, knew he was a drinking man when he entrusted him with part management of the estate, and, as a mat ter of fact he drank more during the life time of his father than he has done since. In support of this he exhibited bills for liquors bought at that time and within re- cent years. While admitting that he Is and has been drinking man, Mir. Brown asserts that he has never been intoxicated and that no one in Atlanta can say they have seen him absolutely drunk.
 The foregoing and other interesting features will all be elucidated by testi- mony from many witnesses during the hearing which it Is expected will occupy the greater part of next week.