Arizona republican., 1919-03-27
SERVED MRS. MACKAY
 INSTEAD OF FAMILY
 LAW FIRM ALLEGES

Scores of letters and telerams were introduced by the plaintiff to prove the firm served in a legal capacity to Mrs. Grace MacKay in the suit for S7,5S14S brought by Chalmers, Stahl, Fennemore and Longan against Mrs. been offered when court adjourned last evening and many more will be presented when the case is continued this morning before Judge Baughn.
 It was learned through the intro duction of telegrams that the firm was asked to represent the Mackay the Vulture Mines company through Angus MacKay, the law firm consid- cred it it's duty to represent the woman rather than the Canadian relatives of the dead man who left an estate of over s1,500 900. Mrs. MacKay requested the attorneys to look after her inter- ests after MacKay's death in Oakland according to telegrams and testimony offered by members of the law firm who are seekinb compensation for al- legged service.
 Mrs. MacKay appeared in the court room, but immediately upon the com mencement of the suit walked to an adjoining room where she remained until the recess hour when her at torney held a brief consultation with her. She did not return in the after noon when a somewhat irregular pro- ceeding was followed by counsel for the defense calling Dr. Win Wylie to the stand to explain her absence. The physician stated that it required only a little excitement for his patient to go to pieces and that she was com pletely unnerved by the court action. He said that some time ago he ad- vised her to go to a sanitorium for a months complete rest and quiet.
 There was an echo of the scandal that came out during the probate of will proceedings when the lawyer plaintiffs stated that the firm had wired their client to forward them the date of her marriage to MacKay when his will was made known. In the will Mackay left his property to Carrie Kunz MacKay, and Mrs. MacKay had always been known to the firm as Grace MacKay. In reply Mrs. Mackay informed counsel that she and Angus MacKay had lived together for IS years and were then married in New Jersey. She gave the date of mar riage as April 20, 1907, and wrote her lawyers that her husband gave the minister fee, but had received no license. Frightened at being disin- herited by his millionaire father MacKay is alleged to have kept the marriage a secret and to have lived in Wickenburg while Mrs. MacKay re- mained in Phoenix where she was known as Grace Mackay and also as Grace Macdonald.
 The plaintiffs contended that their legal services for Mrs. MacKay had advanced to such a step that she had authorized a settlement with the Mac Kay family whereby she was to re- ceive $2,000 a month for life, when Mrs. MacKay started differen pro- ceedings instituted by Joseph Lacey an Oakland attorney, who is alleged to have received sS0,00o fee from Mrs. MacKay.
 It is understood that scores of at torneys will be called to the stand tc 1 testify that the fee asked by Chalmers I Stahl. Fennemore and Longan is nol exorbitant and that Robert Greer | counsel for Mrs. MacKay, will insis ! that it is. It is said that he will clain 1 that the MacKay property in this stat,
 was comparatively small and that tn, bulk of the property was in Canada
 and would have been cared for by 1 Canadian counsel.