Los Angeles herald., 1910-10-21
GLENDALE CHEERS
WO0LWINES SPEECH
Conduct of the District Attorneys
Office Severely Criticised at
Enthusiastic Meeting
tcontlnued from Pare onel

o indicate that any agreement or dis
,ussion as to fees had occurred pre-
,ious to October 10. Mr.. Gales am
lavit follows:
State of California, County of Los
Angeles, IS.
John L. Gales, being first duly
sworn, deposes and says: That l
reside in the city of Whittier, in
the county of Los Angeles; that
am the husband of Elizabeth King
Gales. daughter of Michael H.
King, deceased, and one of the
heirs of Mr.. King.
Mr. Fredericks has insisted in
various speeches that my wife and
l, and Sarah King Volkmor, an
other heir, and her husband, Mr..
Yolkmor, employed him as an at
torney to contest the wills in the
civil courts, and that the agree
ment as to his employment was
entered into before anything was
known of any forgery. This po-
sition is false for the reason that
shortly after the first will was filed,
that is, shortly after July 8, 1906,
and before the second will was
filed, we called upon him at his
office in the courthouse and Mr..
Volkmor and myself went with
Fredericks to the clerks Office and
inspected the first will, and the
opinion was expressed at that
time by Mr.. Volkmor as we'll as
myself, in the presence of Fred
ericks, that the codicils to the first
will were forgeries.
No agreement was entered into
with Fredericks about his en-
ployment as an attorney in any
civil suit at that time, and moth
ing further was done in the mat
ter until I received q letter from
Mr.. Fredericks under date of Au-
gust 29, 1906, stating that a Sec
ond will of Michael H. King had
been filed. Within two or three
DAYS thereafter we all came in
and called upon Mr.. Fredericks
in his office In the courthouse,
and Mr.. Volkmor and myself went
with Mr.. Fredericks, as in case OF
the first will, down to the clerks
office to inspect the second will,
which we did, and Mr.. Volkmor
and myself as well as Mr.. Fred
ericks agreed that the second will
bore all the appearance of a for
gerry.
EARLY EVIDENCE OF FoRGERIEs
So, it will be seen that Freder-
icks had every reason to believe
that the codicils to the first will as
we'll as the entire second will were
forgeries as early as the latter part
of August, 1906. No agreement as
to his employment as an attorney
to contest these wills in the civil
courts was made at this time even.
On the other hand, 1 stated to
Mr.. Fredericks then and there,
upon the inspection of the second
will: IF it is a forgery, Fred,
whoever did 1t, send the sons-a
guns to the pen:" and Fredericks
answered, mo, It is the money we
want" his exact language being,
ut is the mon we want"
As a matter of fact, he did not
file contests to the wills until as
late as October 8, when contests
to both wills were entered, and in
these contests he states over his
own signature that the codicils to
the first will were forged by Lucy
King and some other person or
persons unknown; and that the en-
tire second will was a forgery.
His employment as an attorney
to contest the matter in the civil
courts was not thought of, as we
had no knowledge Of what course
to take, but just left the matter
to him until letter was received
from him under date of October 3,
1906, on the stationery Of the dis
trict attorneys office, which reads
as follows:
"Mr. John Gales, Whittier, Cal.
My Dear Friend: I have just had
a conference with Governor Gage
in regard to the King case, and
he desires to meet Mrs. Gales and
Mrs. Volkmor together with your
self and Mr.. Volkmor, Wednes-
day morning, the 10th inst, at
ten o'clock, at his office in the
Mason opera house building. If
Won can 1 wish you would all be
present at that time. Everything
is going on all right. We have
filed contests to both wills. Gov
ernor Gage thinks it better that
we should make some arrange
ment in regard to fees, expenses,
etc, as it appears likely that we
will have a protracted contest.
with kind regards, I am, yours
truly, J. D. FREDERICKS."
CLAIMS ADMISSION IN CONTRACT
In accordance with that request
Mrs. Gales and l and Mr.. and
Mrs. Volkmor called at the dis
trict attorneys office in the court
house, and went in company with
Fredericks to Governor Cages
Once where we We're induced to
enter into the contract for fifty
80 G
Volkmor and Mrs. Gales, This
contract bears date of October 10,
and is signed in the handwriting
of J. D. Fredericks. This contract,
which is in my possession, admits
over the signature Of F'redericks
that the codicils to the first will
were forgeries, and that the Sec
and will was an entire forgery.
In other words, John D. Freder-
iclxs knew that the codicils to the
first will were forgeries. and that
the last will was an entire forgery
long before the contests in the
case and long before he ever in
duced us to enter into any con-
tract for fifty per cent of the
shares of Mrs. Volkmor and Mrs.
Gales: and his statement that his
employment as an attorney in the
civil suit was entered upon before
he became aware of the forgeries,
is utterly and entirely false.
No agreement OF any kind was
ever made, verbally or otherwise,
as to the payment of any fees in
this matter, and no discussion Of
any nature, verbal or otherwise,
ever occurred as to fees until the
10th of October, 1906, when the
written contract was entered into
as before stated. From the time
the wills were filed until the set
tlement Of the estate Mr.. Fred
ericks was told time and time
again by myself, Mrs. Gales, Mr.
Volkmor and Mrs. Volkmor, and
bv each of them, that Lucy King
= s....na A1nn nndinile to thA firaf