Amador ledger. (Jackson, Amador County, Calif.) 1875-19??, 1907-10-04
She then i'm the latter part

| was mad. She then In the latter part
of March or the first of April wrote
to her daughter enclosing a note to
the Lords terminating her tenancy of
the house, and instructing her to re-
move the furniture, which she testifi-
ed was sent to Redruth, an adjoining
village to be sold, but has not been
sold. She also testifies that she sent
for her youngest son to come to this
country. On April II, 1907, in a
conversation with MI K. A. Free
man, who called upon her and en-
deavored to sell her some real estate,
she stated that she was not in posi-
ton to talk about buying real estate
at present, because she had not yet
determined to remain here. She
testified at the hearing that she had
intended coming here for a long
time, and intended to stay if she
liked it. but admitted on cross
examination that she had never
mentioned this intention to anyone,
or expressed it in any of her letters
to Mrs Clements, or her son Willie,
or any one else. She further testifies
that she likes this country and in
tends to remain, and is resident of
California. She and Mrs Greaves
deny the conversation of April u.
1907, testified to by Mr. Freeman, and
relate different conversation, but
Mr. Freeman denies that Mrs Greaves
was present at the conversation.
From the evidence only partly
stated above, this court is called
upon to draw it's conclusions.
Counsel for petition contend that the
evidence of Mr. Freeman falls to the
ground, and needs no notice by rea-
son of the testimony of Mrs Symon
and Mrs Greaves. 1t is not the
quantity but the quality of the testi-
mony that should govern the court.
Mr. Freeman is reportable member
of the bar of this county and state,
and has been for many years, was dis
trict attorney of this county for four
years. practicing before this court.
To adopt the version of his testimony
urged by counsel for respondent.
arily committed perjury in order
that the public administrator and
his counsel might receive the fees
and commissions of this estate, and
to base this finding upon the testi-
mony of one seeking to inherit the
estate of the deceased as his illegiti-
mate daughter properly legitimated
under our statutes, and her friend
both strangers to our country, our
customs and our laws, and further
more Freeman was entirely disinter-
ested.
A careful examination of all the
acts, declarations and conduct TO the
said Elizabeth Jane Symon from the
death of William Henry Russell to
the time of the hearing forces the
conclusion that she never intended to
change her residence, and that she is
not bona fide resident of the state
of California, and was not at the
date of the nomination of petitioner.
This conclusion renders it un-
necessary for the court to pass upon
the other issues rendered, as this is
decisive of the application. They can
be properly and fully determined
when the estate is ready for distri-
button and all parties will then be
bound by such determination. To
decide them now might hamper the
court in its final determination, and
might also be detrimental to Mrs
Symons.
The public administrator has had
charge of the probating of this estate
for nearly year, and the interests of
the estate will be best subserved in
his continuance.
1t follows that the petition of j. ohm
S. Orchison should be denied.
Counsel for respondent will pre-
pare findings and order accordingly.
Done in open court, September 81,
1907. r. g. Rust Judge.