The evening world., 1913-08-06
MET. TRUST LOSES
THE FIGHT over
MCDONALD CASE
Letters Revoked on Petition of
Laura Mcdonald Stallo,
Oneo the Actresses.
MILLION LOSS CLAIMED.
Securities Worth S2,7O0, 900
Involved in the Noted
Will Case.
MILLION LOSS CLAIMED.

VIII N<0SSs
I-sttsns Of administration granted 60
the Metropolitan Trust Company upon
the estate Of the late millionaire Aisx-
andsr Mcdonald were revoked to-day
by suYrogats Cohalan. The revocation
was made It the request Of Laura Nc
Donald staiio. Granddaughter Of the
millionaire and daughter OF Edmund X.
Stalio.
she charged that the trust company
had sold securities held BY the cor
poration upon . note for ss.7oo,ooo
made by Mcdonald and stailo while
the market was low. which resulted IN
a Toss to the estate Of more than
81, o0o, 900, and prior to the expiration
Of q two.ysar renewal Of the note
made by the trust company. The trust
company contended that no such 70.
newal of the note had been made. and
that when the securities were sold IL
was believed the best time to sell FOR
the benedt Of the estate
Surrogate CohAlaA IN his decssson eGys
that the 1.7oo.ooo note provided that the
company had the night TO sell AL sscuri-
ties upon the non-payment OF the note
when due. After the expiration OF the
maturity date tho securities were sold
and the excess proceeds wsrs held by
the company a. administrator for the -.
tate. Continuing. the decissoon sets forth
that Miss Stailo. her father and her SIS
ter, prior to the maturity Of the note.
called at the trust company once and
obtained . two-year renewal on ths
note
'uf the Metropolitan Trust Company.
~ payee Of the note for c,7oo.ooo ana
pledges Of the securities deposited With
II to secure payment OF the note. agreed
TO renew the note for two years -
stated in the petition. IL sale OF the -
cur1ties bseors the maturity q the note
a. % renewed resulted IN . loss 70 che
estate Of over one million doa,ars." thu
decision says. ''TMrefore the ri0ht Of
the estate oe Alexander Mcdonald TO
the difference between tho amount re-
aaised upon the saie OF the securities
and ths amount for which they could
have been sold at the tine q the 81.
plration of the renewed note 10 depend
emit upon che determination OF the Issue
raised by this allegation In the %
tition.
GRANTED ONLY ON CONSENT
OF THE PARTIES.
The Surrogate continues to explair
| that letters Of administration wer'
granted 10 the trust company only upor
| the consent of parties entitled to act u
| administrator. such power being vested
by law In Q Surrogate. Stsllo was ap
pointed at the same time ~ co-admin
istrator, but HIS letters have since beer
revoked, and the Surrogate In this con
nectlon Gays:
| But a. the letters were granted q
the trust company In conjunction will
staiio. not because OF any Independent
| right which the trust company had I,
such letters. 1t would appear that q
the letters is-ued to Staiio have bssi
revoked and the next Of kin now OBJ
1sct to the continuance Of the trus
company a. administrator the letter,
issued to II a. co-administrator ma!
be revoked In the discretion Of tn,
Surrogate without an allegation OF tn
existence Of any grounds mentioned 1,
the code for the revocation Of let
tsrs.
'Connictng statements and conten
lions" the decision says, create Al
Issue Of fact between the Mstropolits,
Trust Company and the next Of kin o
the decedent which, n Il had sxists
at the time the trust company apple,
for letters upon the estate Of ~isxande
Mcdonald, would have prevented
from obtaining such letters"
In reaching the conclusion mat Tn
trust company had taken 4 stand An
sson,.t,c 70 IN. ,n,sre.t. a, ~. at. ;.