The San Francisco call., 1910-06-04

A4AA%A<%AAAA<%A
designation of the gifts of Claus
Spreckels as an advancement. The
attorneys for Rudolph and c. A Spreck-
els were forced TO admit yesterday
that all they had to base their conten-
tion upon was the following passage
from the will of the deceased:
PASSAGE FROM WILL
II have made no provision in this
Will for my sons, John d. Spreckels and
Adolph B. Spreckels, for the reason
that 1 have already given to them
large part of my estate"
That wording" declared Attorney
Brobeck yesterday, does not constitute
an advancement
There was a large gathering of at
torneys in Judge Coffey's court yester-
day For John D. and Adolph Spreckels
there were Morrison, Brobeck, Dunno
and Shortridge. For Rudolph and c. A
Spreckels there were Charles 5. Wheel
er. O. X Cushing and G. S. Cushing.
Attorney A F. Morrison opened the
proceedings yesterday by declaring
that an effort had been made to serve
subpenas on Rudolph and c. a Spreck-
els but that both were out of the
state. He added that a subpoena had
been served on their attorney, Charles
S Wheeler, asking him 10 produce the
..papers'' which the answer claimed
would show that the transfers by
Spreckels to his sons had been advance
ments. 1--WE are entitled to- an in
spection of those documents" argued
Morrison "They have the books OF
Claus Spreckels; we have as much
right to them as they have to our
witnesses
wheeler said that the papers would
be produced at the right time. but
subsequently admitted that the viii OF
the decedent was their sole reliance
.sYou will facilitate this case if you
allow us to inspect these writings,
suggested Attorney Dunno
UP TO SUPREME COURT
Wheeler did not offer that facilita-
tion He opened his case by ''bowing TO
the decision Of the court that the trust
clause of Claus Spreckels' will was void
Though" he added, I'VE will raise that
question again in the supreme court
But for the purposes of this case we
will bow to your honor's decision. On
that assumption, Claus Spreckels dled
intestate and the will stands merely to
amply TO the appointment of the eXecu-
tors If it be fact that Claus Spreck-
els advanced to these heirs portion of
his estate in excess of what they were
entitled to in consideration Of the IN
testacy of the estate, we Will oppose
this distribution to them of any further
allowance" Wheeler continued by stat
ing that the case was governed by sec
tions 1895 and 1897 of the civil code.
He questioned the rights Of his oppo-
nents to demand the papers on which
he based his case.
Wheeler then called John d. Spreckels
to the stand. Spreckels testified that
he was the eldest son of the late Claus
Spreckels and that the other children
d r lr-
els. Mrs. Emma Ferris and Rudolph
Spreckels. All other children had died
without issue prior to 1892, the time in
point.
VALUES OF THE GIFTS
SpreckeIs then enumerated the trans
fers made to him and his brother, A. B.
Spreckels, by their father beginning
with the gift in 1898 of stock in the.
American sugar refinery company. He
cited other gifts, which were included
in the schedule filed with the court.
Wheeler questioned the witness on the
earning capabilities of the various
stocks received. Some of these, said
the witness, paid dividends. Others did
not. He said that the Oceanic steam
ship company stock has no market
value at present.
While there was no transfer of actual
cash recorded, there were transfers of
real property al 01OnlClSJ COuuly. AT
the request of Wheeler, A. B. Spreckels
produced deeds and memorandum of
transfers, which were identified by the
witness and marked as court exhibits.
These deeds were executed by Claus
and Anna c. SpreckeIs to John D. and
A B. Spreckels. The witness stated
that the records showing the dividends
earned by the corporations were de-
stroyed in the fire.
At the afternoon session of the court
Spreckels concluded his testimony
A. B. Spreckels was then called to
the stand and testified briefly in sub
sanitation of his brother.
Wheeler then raised the question of
the value of Claus Spreckels estate
at the time just after the last transfer
had been made I'VE claim" he said
that the value was then $500, 900.
We wish TO show the relative value
of that which was given to the sons
and that which remained in the es-
tate"
we all know those figures are not
correct" replied Morrison.
APPRAISEMENT CITED
Dunno stated that the present value
of the estate was, under the appraise-
ment of the court $4,000, 600, and that
there had been great amount of
value destroyed by the fire of 1906.
Mr.. Spreckels will testify that be-
fore the fire the estate was valued at
s13, 900 ,000,'' volunteered Morrison.
we want the value in 1904" replied
Wheeler.
In 1904" said Morrison, .the real
property was valued at s10,o00,0 900, and
an estimated valuation of the personal
property was $s,000.000."
Closing that part for the time
Wheeler tacitly admitted that his
clients had no writing to support their
contention that the gifts of Claus