Los Angeles herald., 1907-07-03
ISSUES ORDER IN
HIGGINS CASE
JUDGE TELLS DEFENDANT TO
APPEAR
Will Contest May Be Opened Again by
Order of Judge Rives--Mrs.
Lillian c. Rand Makes
Statement

to have set aside the probate of the
will of Hiram Higgins, deceased, hus-
band of the plaintfff, Judge Rives yes
| terday issued an order citing the de-
fendant, Mrs. Lillian c. Rand to appear
July 29 and show cause why the case
should not be reopened
| The suit was filed several months
ago, 1t being alleged in the complaint
that Mrs. Rand, daughter of the testa-
tor, had exercised undue influence
over her father, persuading him to
make will in June, 1905, that be-
queathed to the defendant practically
all of the Higgins estate.
| Hiram Higgins was a wealthy Chi
cagoan, who came to Los Angeles ten
years ago. In 1902 he was taken seri-
ously ILL., resulting in his being prac-
tically an invalid during the last four
or five years of his life. In 1906 the
plaintiff alleged she was obliged on ac-
| count of her physical condition to go
| to the old home in Chieago for recuper-
alton, and during her absence Mrs.
Rand tenderly nursed her father.
During the absence of his wife the
deceased made the will which his wild
oW is now seeking to have set aside.
| Mrs Rand, the defendant, is a beauti-
full woman, being possessed of rich
| contralto voice. is highly cultivated, an
| accomplished harpist, and prominent
leader in the society of Chicago, Iowa
and Los Angeles.
She is the possessor of a considerable
fortune in her own right, having re-
ceived $4,000 on a single policy of life
insurance on the death of her husband
in 1902, Charles w. Rand, a wealthy
lumber merchant of Iowa.
Mrs. Rand's Statement
Mrs. Rand is now in the east, to be
with her son. who is about to take his
final examination for admission to Har-
ward. Her attitude toward her mother
and brother is shown in a statement
which she made to her attorneys and
which was obtained from them last
night. In substance it is as follows:
II have explained to you in the con-
situations we have had just what my
attitude is in regard to the whole mat
ter, and what motives control my ac-
tions. l am concerned, first of ALL with
the question of true loyalty to my be-
loved father. His wishes, as expressed
in his will, are law to me. 1 loved,
honored and respected him, and would
not, under any consideration, directly
or indirectly, assist in, or be a party
to, setting his wishes, so expressed, at
defiance. He was my father, and the
best, dearest and kindest father any
child ever had. I shall be loyal to him
and his memory. To any one reading
his will his business sagacity, sound
judgment and keen foresight are so
apparent that it would be simply fool
ish and waste of time for me to en-
phasize that phase of the subject. The
will of my father is wholly his own.
I have known since l was child that
it was his settled purpose to make a
trust will. But with the provisions of
that will I was unacquainted-never
having dictated or even suggested what
they should. be; and 1 never knew the
contents of the will until it was read
to me by Mr.. Russ Avery after my
fathers DEATH AS to the sufficiency
or insufficiency of the provision made
by my father in his will for the son
nothing need be said by me. My
father, it would seem, after calm de-
liberation placed on record his wish
and Judgment in the matter.
1.-The other question that I am con-
cerred with is that my father saw fit
to make certain provisions for his
grandchildren. 1 am sure that l nave
neither the moral nor the legal right
to disregard his wishes in that respect,
or to take any action that would tend
to prevent the fulfillment of his de-
sires. The fact that these grandchil-
dren of his are my own children makes
the obligation resting upon me greater,
not less. If l failed to do all in my
power to protect and guard their in
terest I should be derelict in my duty
and open to the severest condemnation.
From what I have said 1T will be
clear to you that I cannot give my con-
sent to the proposals of the contestants
as outlined in your letter of February
26. or any similar proposition.
''Shortly after my fathers death my
mother and l proposed to my brother
that we should make such disposition
of the income to be derived by US from
the estate as would place him on the
same footing as ourselves; in other
words, that we would, during his life
time, assure his receiving, practically,
one-third of the income from the
estate. I felt and still feel, that L
would not be disloyal to my father in
disposing of what would be coming
to me from month to month, such
amount being mine exclusively. Th1s
course would not involve any inter-
ference with the estate proper, which
is held in trust under the Will Thls
offer was rejected by my brother, not
only emphatically, but insultingly. At
the time 1 was of the opinion that the
offer should not be renewed. However,
if YOU deem it wise to do so, 1 author
ize YOU to renew, on my own behalf,
this offer, with or without the concur
renee of my mother, in order that 1
may not appear to be inconsistent or
arbitrary. 1t is my further purpose,
acting for myself in my own way, to
devote the remainder of my own in-
come from my fathers estate to the
relief and support of certain persons
of my fathers own flesh and blood-a
niece and her children, one of whom is
a cripple.
"I have offered to make these conces-
sions for the sake of peace and har-
mony, not because 1 feel morally or
legally bound to recede from the stipu-
lations of my fathers will. If these
concessions are not appreciated by the
contestants-my mother and brother
but should be rejected by them, am
ready for the ordeal of the threatened
suit.
'It goes without saying that it will
be annoying and mortifying to me, but
being conscious of the strength of my
position and the rectitude of my mo-
tives, and feeling the great RESPONSE
bility and high duty to loyalty which
owe to the memory of my honored
father, will meet with all the courage
and fortitude that 1 possess the test TO
which may be subjected in the unwar-
,.a.a+Al affaY11f1f n uiO1anflV a assault HE