The San Francisco call., 1910-06-04
SPRECKELS Will
SOLE EVIDENCE
OF TWO HEIRS
Produce No Writing TO Prove
That Gifts to Brothers Were
"Advancements''
Fictitious Values Given in An=
swer Nearly Cut in Two by
Sworn Testimony

The attempt made by Rudolph
SpreckeIs and c. A. SpreckeIs to prove
that John .. Spreckels and Adolph B.
Spreckels received from their father
money in excess OF sl0.OOo.OO0 as an
advancement for their interest in the
estate of the late Claus Spreckels failed
signally yesterday at the hearing be-
fore Superior Judge Coffey. With both
Rudolph and c. A. Spreckels out of the
city their attorney, Charles S. Wheeler,
was forced 10 place on the stand John
D. Spreckels to testify TO the gifts.
Thus. from the mouth OF their own
witness. the two brothers. Rudolph and
C. A. had to accept the fact that the
sifts amounted to S1O,430.710.91 and
not I9.s4s.2 .2943l. as they had alleged
in their answer 10 the motion Of John
y. and Adolph B. Spreckels for dis
rribution Of the estate of their de-
ceased father.
WILL THEIR ONLY PROOF
Driven 10 produce promised proof
that the gifts to John d. SpreckeIs and
AdoIph were an advancement" the at
torneys for Rudolph had to recede
from their position that they had writ
ten proof. specifically designating the
gifts as an advancement and fell
lamely back on the submission of the
viii as their sole evidence. The will of
Claus Spreckels has already been ef-
fected by a prior decision Of the court
and the trust clause Of the document
excluded from consideration.
The chief points in controversy yes
terday and which viii be taken up for
further consideration next Friday at
II o'clock were the amount of the gifts
made by Claus Spreckels to his sons.
the value Of his estate Immediately
subsequent TO the last transfer. and
the application of the terms of the
Spreckels viii as determining whether
or not the gifts were an advance
ment' from the estate of the decedent
TO his sons in accordance with the
meaning Of the word under section 1897
of the civil code Of the state Of Cali
fornia.
Judge Coffey advised the attorneys
to get together and agree upon the val
uauons. This viii possibly be done
during the ensuing week.
GIFTS FREELY DISCUSSED
John D. Spreckels and A. B. Spreck-
els were on the stand yesterday and
freely discussed the gifts made to them
by their father. IN addition TO the
gifts. amounting to S10,4S07I0sI, which
hrf hr7 6ar~ Id, 4
their father, John u. Spreckels testified
that they had also received stock in the
american sugar refinery company to
the value OF about $1,000. 0OO. John D.
Spreckels and A. b. Spreckels received
each 5000 shares of both common and
preferred stock, and Mrs. Emma Ferris.
a daughter, received 10000 shares of
November 16. 1893. Subsequently Mrs.
Ferris returned all Of her gifts. save
the property in Market street opposite
Mason
Attorney Wheeler for Rudolph
Spreckels raised a point on the value
OF California sugar refinery stock.
which proved somewhat Of a BOOM
ersng 10 the interests Of his clients.
Referring to the value Of the gift of
,, 40 shares Of stock in the California
sugar refinery company. Wheeler asked
what was the value Of the stock.
+'One thousand dollars a share" re-
sponded Spreckcls.
DO you know of any transfers made
at that fgure?" asked Wheeler.
Yes" replied the witness. Fifteen
hundred shares were purchased of c.
a. Spreckels at 81 600 a share"
Were there any other purchases
made?'
yes; so shares We're purchased of
Rudolph Spreckels for $4,000 a share. ''
H. seT T..n-- u
How do you explain that difference
that $4,000 share would be paid 10
Rudolph Spreckels?" insisted Wheeler.
PRICE WAS WORTH 1T
1T was worth several thousand to
get him out Of the company" replied
John y. Spreckels.
The proceedings. yesterday were
based primarily on the petition for a
distribution of the estate of Claus
Spreckels. As an answer 10 the petit
tion. Rudolph Spreckels and g A
Spreckels alleged that during the life
Of the testatOr property in excess 10
uhe value Of their interest in the es-
tate had been given to John .. Spreck-
els and Adolph B. Spreckels as an ad-
Vancement Section 1892 OF the civil
code of California defines an advance
ment as follows:
All gifts and grants are made as
advsncements, if expressed in the gift
or grant 10 be so made. or If charged
IN writing by the decedent as an ad-
vancement. or acknowledged in writ
ing as such, by the child or other sue
.cessor or heir"
It is the contention of the attorneys
for John d. and Adolph SpreckeIs. who
are A +. Morrison, ". I. Brobeclx
Peter F. Dunno and Samuel NJ. Short
ridge. that there has been no such