Perth Amboy evening news., 1914-06-29
Of VILLA
SENT To CARRANZA AS
REBEL LEADERS BREAK
PETERSON SAYS
HE'LL WELCOME
INVESTIGATION n

Peter A. Peterson made a state
ment today concerning the action
of Assistant Prosecutor Joseph E.
Stricker, in which the latter filed
an affidavit with Judge Peter F.
DAILY setting forth that Mr.. Peterson
was not engaged to break the Will
of Peter Skov. The lawyer states
that he had considered himself coun-
sci of record for Peter Skov, Jr.,
who 1t was reported had taken steps
to oppose his fathers will. Mr.. Pc
terson's statement follows:
l am accused of having done more
than my legal duty. Such Lccusa-
tion Is not very serious. There are,
however, cases where an attorney is
justly criticised for failure to do a
duty, even not imposed by law.
am happy that my case does not fall
within the latter class.
During the early part of the sum
mer of 1913, Peter Skov, who is also
| known as Peter Miller, came to my
office on several occasions on legal
| business. He spoke about the un-
happy relation of his father and
mother and how he had left his
since married a woman who has
African blood in her veins, and with
whom he had several children; that
| his father had threatened to disin-
herit him unless he separated him
self from her. ] advised him to re-
main with his family, notwithstand-
ing his fathers opportunities.
| AS soon as / saw the notice in the
| News of his fathers untimely death,
| proceeded at once to the farm at
Port Reading and inquired concern
| ing the whereabouts of said Peter
| Skov. The housekeeper, who is my
client, stated that Peter had left his
! family long since and that no one
knew where he was. In the mean
| time l informed Mr.. Stricken that
was looking after the interest of said
| Peter and that / intended to file a
caveat against the will In question,
because all the children had been ex-
cluded, including Peter, whose inter
est | had at heart. Mr. Stricken
seemed greatly excited and provoked
becauses OF this declaration, he hav-
| ing drawn the will in question and
is undoubtedly anxious that 1t shall
stand the legal test. Mr.. Stricken
also stated that his client, Fritz
| Skov, who is one OF the beneficiaries
! under the Will, was a fair-minded
man and that he intended to do the
right thing by the excluded children.
Before / filed the caveat | met Fritz
Skov coming from the office of Mr..
| Stricken and he told me that he
would give nothing to any of the
children because they did not de-
serve It, AS soon as l received this
information, l filed the caveat, not
knowing where said Peter Skov
could be found. The law provides
that a will can be admitted to pro-
bate unless a caveat is filed within
| ten days after the death of the testa-
tor / filed the cayeat in question to
meet any emergency.
| Coming home from Court on Fri
day evening last my attention was
called to the article In the Evening
| News. / was more than sur
prised Early Saturday morning l
learned that Peter Skov was work
Ing at Railway. / went there to see
him. Upon being asked how he
came to sign the affidavit in question
| he stated that he was instructed to
go TO Mr.. Stricker's Office, and that
| he had made no effort to inform me
| that he did not wish me to contest
the will although he well knew that
| was acting on his behalf and in his
interest. I further asked him If he
was given or promised anything be-
fore signing the affidavit. He said
| that he was in a way, but that he
was not sure how much it would be;
that he was sure that / had acted in
his interest by filing the caveat in
time.
AS regards the procedure of Mr.
| Stricken in the matter, / wish to say
that it was not only bad in ethics,
but bad in point Of law. He should
have given me notice of motion to
strike out the caveat, II improperly
| filed. This he did not do. Had he
| done SO I would have had chance
to explain my position in the mat
ter. He simply went about 1t in an
| underhanded and unprofessional
way without giving the notice re-
| quired by law. AS the case stands
| am still the attorney OF record. not
even the court has the legal right to
strike out the caveat before legal
notice has been served on me. Such
conduct as Mr.. Stricken has shown
in this case might have been over
| looked In the case of young prac-
titioner. Fut in Mr.. Stricker's case
there Is hardly any excuse to find.
His only object seems to have been
| to have me eliminated from this i'm
portant case. There are other cave
ats filed and he has made no obtec-
tion TO any other attorney. Why
should he object to me so long as the
| will Is going to be contested any
| way? Evidently he feels that l
Continued on Page ID