W.(illiam) E.(gbert) VEERKAMP NOTES

Mexico Weekly Ledger, Mexico, MO.

Thursday 21 Jan 1886. "Outline of work to be prepared for January 23rd. Read Confucius, Aristotle, the Cotos, Julius Caesar, Virgil, Horace and Marcus Aurelius. Study with reference to the time in which they lived; their parentage; the circumstances surrounding their early life; chief characteristics; the cause of their celebrity, and what they have done for the peoples of aftertimes. Also the best method of applying a knowledge of Biography in the school room. "

W. E. Veerkamp, Instructor.

Thursday 8 Apr 1886. (from the Rush Hill Racket Column) "Prof. Veerkamp wilJ open a select school at the public school house next Monday, the 12th".

15 July 1886. Notice is hereby given that letters of administration upon the estate of P. C. Skelly, deceased, have been granted to Elizabeth Skelly and W. E. Veerkamp by Probate Courit of Audrain County, Missouri, declaring date of July 10, 1998. All persons having claim against said estate are required to exhibit them for allowance to the Administrator within 1 year after the date or they may be precluded from any benefit of such estate and if such claims be not exhibited within 2 years from this date they will be forever barred.

Eliza.beth Skelly W. E. Veerkamp, administrators.

Thursday 26 Aui 1886. (from the Rush Hill Racket Column) Republican Convention Delegates--Linn Township, W. E. Veerkamp.

9 September 1886. (Rush Hill Racket Column) "The West Lick School was to have begun last Monday but Prof Veerkamp, having pressing business on hand, was postponed a week."

14 October 1886. (Rush Hill News) "The public school taught by Prof Veerkamp is fast filling up ."

Missouri State Tribune, Jefferson City, Missouri 8 November 1902, page 2, col., 3. Governor Dockery Friday appointed W. E. Veerkamp school commissioner of Vernon County, to fill a vacancy caused by the resignation of M. J. Hale.

Laddonia Area Centennial History, p. 25? Superintendents and their tenures since the organization until I 907 were: Robert Hodge, one year; S. T. Davis, one year; R. A. Martin, one year; D. A. Murphy, one year; W. E. Veerkamp, three years . . .

Neosho: A City of Springs (n.p.: Newton County Historical Society, 1984), p. 74. W. E. Veerkamp was elected superintendent [of the Neosho Schools] in 1908.

THE MORNINO MAIL

'Su)lportetl bT Four Mla•o•rl C:oloa<'la. T<> b.~ Editor ot Th• R•Puhllo.

W lll y o u kindl y permi t one 1"bO ha,_, 1be en a reade r o! The R epu bllc !or man y ·)'ears a word or two an~nt the " Ho!ln ' :r>a wg Song"-~

B eing naturally _o ! a timid d lspo~ltio n .

he:s ltated lo ag be fo re de t e r mlnln,g to f>rt e r m y m ite or in!ormatlon In the

.commendable Inquiry that you ar~

'm aking to d iscover th~ authorshi p o! th is t ruly noble classic; and I now d o s o In the Interest o! historic a ccur&cy o nly ; for those whom I shall name are n ow o: blessed m e mory. hence beyond ' the reach o! pr:tise or fla t tery.

1tYhe n I was a boy some !orty y t'ars ago fo Lincoln Count ~-. . Missouri, U ncle Ike H iler co mposed th is pow !amou• s on g : and "01' .<\.I Babber," a · famous f iddler .or "them t imes," 'let the word, t.o mu­.sic .. and played the tun'e at all the .danc.is In Western ~lncol~ and ~I.stern ,M~-1tgornery count!'ea tor years. At these ,dan <'es he usually b egan 'the e•·enll\g ••.-it h ··sal lr' s In the Gyarden a-Sttt!n '

, a nd"; tollo,..· lng th is ..-Ith " B u ffalo ;<;ala." "Arkansas (Arkansaw) T r av­telt'r," " Miss issippi Sawyer." "Ry e

tra w ," " F isherJs Hornpipe,"~ .. Sweet · Ider, " etc. Lo tact, Babber' s reputolr e , e '-med laexb'austl ble. Usually, aa the __ lg-.ht ..-aned and the spirits oC the &nce r s seemed to be !Jagging, SO{Jleone

would call tor " My Houn ' Dawgn ; and ·nsta.ntly the dan ce,, went on both taat

J!ln d furiou,,·: and aa -""1' .' AJ made , 'e.r talk." some ot the boys In the outer lrc le o( spt'ctii.tors would° join In with ,

"Yu got ter · quit · klggln m y d&W&' er-roun."

or course. the lapse o! time ha• mad" It almos t lm~oss i ble t or m e t o otte r j!pc umen la ry evld ,, nce In support ot t he ~O rt."goln g : b ut to the best o r m y know!­, dge <1nd be l ie ! . as th e lawyers 'WOU id ' y , It ls tnie : and I am •Ure tha t •om"

t the o ld- t i mers o( the t1"0 C<>m1!1Unl· , lu m <!!ntloned will rem ember "l:ncle ilke " Hll~ r a nd "Old _.\I" Babbt'r the . , a• " ailed Old Al beca u se there wae a ·:y oun.- . \ 11. the OllP. "" a grea t lover ot th t> h ound . a~ i'llde~ d a ll )i l~sour l an• ot tha t da .\· w P r P : a n d tho!! oth4' r 3~ on~

ho ~ <> ul t! "j ps nac h elly mak<' a t lddle a lk ." J( m y ~ t ateu1e nt ~ a~ set fo rt h abo\·c

art> q u P. s tl on~d In any quarter . I b• l ieve hat 1:01. Dave Ball of Lou isiana. llo .. ol. . C h.a rl ey Jamf'•· oC Nevada, Mo .. Col. Im Ball ot liontgomery City. Mo .. or

. ol: Byron Brown of Tr,oy, Uo .. could I! ca lll'd upon to verlt~· them : and It

· e_e ms I<> me that ! our !\'(issotn'l Colonel• ·oul d make a. prP ttY strOnl' hand.

W . E . VEERKAMP. ' N~osho, Mo., Ft'b. %7.

Right: W. E. Veerkamp's letter dated 27 February 19_1 to the editor of the St. Louis? Republic. It is not known if Col. Byron Brown of Troy was a relative ofW. E. Veerkamp whose mother was Sarah Catherine (Brown) Veerkamp.

4-41 r

CASES DETERMINED INTIIE

ST. WUIS AND THE KANSAS CITY

COURTS OF APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI FROM MARCH 13, 1888 TO MAY 8, 1888

VOL.XXX COLUMBIA, MO.:

E. W. STEPHENS, PUBLISHER 1888

On 24 June 1886 P . C. [Peter Cramer] Skelly, father-in-law of W. E. [William Egbert] Veerkamp, died intestate in Audrain County, Missouri . The Audrain County Probate Court in the May [July] 1886 term appointed W. E. Veerkamp to serve as administrator of the P . C. Skelly estate along with the widow Elizabeth H. Skelly

The widow took exception to the appointment of a co­administrator which had been made in error before the expiration of her widow's option to renounce. In the March 1887 term the Circuit Court set aside the appointment. W. E. Veerkamp appealed this set­aside to the Appellate Court of the State of Missouri. The Appellate Court ruled in favor of the widow.

It is not known if W. E. Veerkamp (who had read for the law) sought this appointment nor why he did not promptly acknowledge the error and resign. This appears completely out of character for him to have made it necessary for his mother-in-law to pursue the matter to the Circuit Court and for him to have carried it even further to the Appellate Court. He must have persisted at the insistence of his wife and possibly her siblings. W. E. Veerkamp's name is mistakenly given as "Edgar," rather than "Egbert" in the Appellate Court records.

According to Elizabeth Skelly's granddaugthter, Fern (Veerkamp) V anBradt, Elizabeth Skelly was not fond of her son-in­law, W. E. Veerkamp, although generally he was considered a kind and honorable man. This law suit may well have been the basis for Elizabeth's dislike for him. Peter Skelly's estate was not large enough that his children were likely to have coveted it. It is more likely his children felt the widow may have needed guidance in the management and preservation of it to meet her future needs.

SKELLY Y. VEERKAMP. 40

ELIZABETH TI. SKELT,Y, Respondent, v. \V. E. VEEn­

KAlCP,. Appellant.

Kansas City Court of Appeals, March 19, 1888.

!. Al>MINISTRATION-GRAl\T OF LETTERS UNDER SECTIO"°"S 7, 8, A?."D ti, REvISED Sr ... TUTEs .-Under the statute relating to · the grantini; ot letters of administration (Rev . Stat., secs. 7, 3, and!>) the probate court has no authority to issue such letters to "some other person,'• within thirty days after the death of the deceased, without ha.vin; received first written rcnnnciations of the right to letters from such as are first entitled thereto. The right of the hu<Jband or wife to administer is their sole ri::;ht, and, without their renuncia­tion, cannot be di.,ide<l with others.

2. -- -- REVOCATIOS OF LETTEitS !AIPROPERT.Y G:CA~TED­CASE ADJ~DGEo.-The probate court b:i.s power nnd authority to revoke or cancel letters uuw:i.rr:mtnbly issued; ·as· in th.is c:l.Se; nor can there be any question of the authority to do this at a subse­quent term. The appointment was at the least ai:i in:egularity, patent of record, and in such cases conrts may s<?t aside Judgments or other proceedings at any time within Lhree years.

.APPEAL from A.mlrain Circuit Court, IIoN. E. ;.L HUGHES, Judge.

.Affirmed.

The case is sta.tecl in the opinion.

W. H. Kmrn.AN', for the appellant. I. The affic1a;dt ·or complaint of respondent does

not comply with the requirements of the statute in sn~h case made and provided, in form and language, or m substance. The affid::i;dt or complaint of respondent does not contain any charge for removing an adminis­trator known to the law or to the st::i.tutes of this state. Rev. Stat. 1879, sec. 27. The complaint or affidavit should be drawn in the exact words of the statute and

VoL. :x:xx-4

30 .M1ssoum APPEAL REPOltTS.

prn'·"11 h t> fore :rn ail miuistr:i.tnr r.an be. ri>moved. It ~lto11 Id co11 f11r111 to the 1:;t,a.tute. in form a111l language ur i 11 s 11 bs I a net-! dose 1.v.

J l. It. is seLtled law tlmt probate courts possess a 1·1·rtain original j11ris(li ction as n•ganls ma.tters of :Hl­rniuist.rat ion . Y et that juristL·:ction can only be exer­(' isl'cl in th e manner prescribetl by the statute. PoW<!rs r. JUok1:y, Hi J\Io. 4:37. The court found specially that. 11i. ~ r··1 w:1s a 111i s ta.k e produced on the probate court ancl 1 · 111 1~ re•l j 11dgrn f.! 11 t removing a.ppellan t a.s co-:ulmin is-1 r:i tor. The j 11dg111ent or order of the probate court, :q •p<>inting de fe1111ant (appellant.) co-allminist.ratoi· of :-ai\l es tate. "·as made at tile ~fay term, 1SSG. 'fbe orr1•··r. :-e t ti ug a side the onler of appoint!Tlent of said def emla 11 t, <·o-a<lniinist rat.or of said estate, nm<le at Ma.y term, 18Kfi, was m:ule :it. the J\farch term, 1887, of the probate court. A cuurt 111:1y, for irregularity or mistake, set aside a j\l(lgme nt, n•ntlered by it at any time during the tenu ; J.11 t not a ft er, 1111 less t.11e mistake a ppe:1 rs of record. H1wk in r. L rul)/o11, rn J\io. App. &7-:1.; .Nelsvn v. Ulti;:,·. di11, 17 l\lo. App. liv:J.

F1:Y & l\lo~BY, for the responllent. f. \\'Jwn a c:ise is triecl Lefore the court without

:i j 11 ry a n<l no ohjedions are made to any of the evhle 11 eP­:11Hl no i11struc tiuus asked or given, the .jt1(lg111ent; will hi atlin11 e(l. R eese v. Cvok, 17 l\J o. App. GJ2; Nolmul r . Jlrcwslcr, 17 l\Io. A11J..>. 4U7; Jl(trr iit!Jlon v. liiinur) :--11 l\lo. 270.

Jr. Th e :1ppui11trnent of 1lr··f1>1H1:iut as ro-atlminis-1 rator with pl~1intiff was by mistake :rnd tltro11gh thr ! fra11(l of df'femlant., :incl the comt ha(.l authority to n·,·oke tl1P le tt.ers as to him wh1~ 11 the lllistake was di s-1·11 vered. Ne Cribc ·1.•. L ewis, 70 l\fo. 2Dli; In re estate oj J/11cksfrp, 5 J\l() . A11p. Ml2. L e f.te rs of a.tlmillistration 111ay he rcvok.eu wlteu " there was essential fraud, error, 11r mis tak e in t.he original decree arnl appointmeut." "A co unty prohafo court, may, of its own motion , in ~t i ­

l11 te a ml l'arry on proceedings to re\·oke ils irreg11lar

; . . j :.

·~~· . . .Ji If.

;' · ? . · ..

SKELJS v. VEEHKAMP. GI

decrees." Schouler on Exec11tors, sec. 1G3; R ev. Stat., secs. ~7, 43.

III. 'l'he probate l'ottrt had no authority to appoint the defe1lll:111t. lJHI ii the widow :tllll chihlren of age renounced their right to atlminister in writing, or h:ul given their consent in writing, the court had no authority to appoint a stranger. 'l'lwre is no more autltol'ity to appoint a strnnger alon g with the wi(low than t.o appoint him alone. Rev. lStat., sel'S. 7, !J ; JII1tllauph?J 1). Sl. Louis Oounty Coud, u l\fo. M3; 8chouler on Executors, secs. 112, 113, 153, 1fi4; StcvMns 1i . Latlt ro;>, 21 1vf<iss. 33. In Co!Jb v. Newcomb, i36 l\fass. 330, h eld the widow cannot nominate another to tile exclusion of n ext of kin.

IV. 'l'he court should lia ve rnvoked the letters as to defendant under section 43, H ev ised ~tat11t1~s , becarn;e he "failell to discharge his d n t.ies," and "acted so ns to endangP.r 11i1; co-administrator," ns was suhstan t iatetl Ly the evidence.

EJ,LISON, J .-'l'he foll owing is that p orti on of the complaint n ecessary to n ot ice, which W<l S fil ed in th e probate conrt, a.ml upon which this proceellillg was based: "Now, this (by, comes Elizabeth Skelly, willow of the late P . U. Skelly, a.ml files this, h er motion, aml says, that saitl P. C. Skelly die<l on the tweHty-fonrth day of J nn e, lH.80, ]1~avi11g ]tis wife, i;aicl Elizabeth Skelly, who was ancl js Jirst entitleu to at1111i11i ste r on the estate of said r. <.:. Skell;r, d eceased, before any other person or p P.rsons; that \Yilhin thirty tlays aft.er the death of said P. C. Skelly, sa.icl Elizabeth 8kelly, as the witlow of said P. C. 8kelly, appliecl for 1ett.ers of a<lministra.tion 011 saitl estate, aml asketl to h1 i appuiutetl such acln~inistratrix; tli:tt on the - - day of --, 188(i, within thirty dny:s after the tleath of saitl P . C. 8kellv, the probate court of snitl county granted le tters of a.cl­ministraLion to oue Egbert V eerka111p, a strnnger to sairl estate, along with the saitl Elizabeth 8k elly, without t11 e consent, a11 rl wilhont antl before said. Elizabeth ll. Skdly tiled h er rennndati on in writing with the ('] erk

of sni1l proh:t!P eot11t, re1urn1id11g- her right to rul111i11istor, nrnl wit lwut :rny n~1111n1 ~ iat. ion or c1n1se11t on her part for ot lier }H'l'SO!l than herself to a1lrni11ister. A ml com -. pl:ti11:111t. asks the conrt to revoke the letters of :ul11iiiiiH­tr:1t ion ht•r1~tof'Pre iss111•tl to Eclgnr Vec!rk:11np, :1111l that 11'111'rs of :uln1i11ist.ra,t.ion alone he issued to complainant, :t'-' t Iii~ sole ad111inist.rator of said estatP, a& the law pro­,·itl••:-:.,,

The <':111s1~ \r:ts apJH':tle1l to 1111~ 1·irc11it. co11rt., where .i11d~111p11t was r<'t1dPn·1l l'l!lllo\·i11g- 1lt-f'e11d:tnt :t11tl ca11-<'•·llin~ his appoi11t1H1'11t.. 1t appea.rs from the evidence t.11:11 . plaint.ill'. who is the wi1luw, aml 1lt'ft>n<lanL her so11-in-l:rn., " ·ent before the probate 1·our(, witllin tliirty days of the death u[ the UPceasecl nnd were appointed co-acl-111inislrators of the estate. The testimo11y was co111lict­i11g as to " ·li<'tli<'r l'l:d11t.iff k11ew that <1efe1111:t11t \\':IS

I wing nppointt·tl wit.h ht>r. She tPstilietl she <li1l not; 1 . h~t she signe1l pa11ert; wl1id1 sl1e was re1p1est.e<l to sign, :11t1l for t11fl n•as11n sh1~ s1q1poserl it w:1q necessary for l11·r to 110 so; that she i11tl•JH1t>1l to ad111i11ister alonean<1 only s11pp11se1l 1ld•·1Hl:111t wonltl assist lier, as a ·friend nrnl kill';111a11, in f11n management of the affairs of the estat1·. Thn court fonn1l that the letters were gr:mted to defrtH1-:111t. by rnistnk<>. 'l'hP. casf\ concedes that she never 1ile<l her renunciation of hn right to administer.

His provhll'J hy stat.ute (Hev. St.at., 1870, secs. 7, ~. a 1111 !)) that le(,tf'l"S or atlminist.rat.ion shall be grnntetl first to tl1e husbnml or wife; that in cnse they clo riot :1 ]'ply with in t.h irty 11a.ys, the court, j ndg<', or clerk may, 011 mot.ion, issue a citation to ap1H'ar :uul qualify for :1d 11ii11ist.ratirrn, arnl if they fail to 11.ppcar within five d:1ys, lettern m:iy be gr:n1tcll to some 0U1er person; that l..ttns 111:1y ht> µ-r:111te11 to some ot.hc1· person at any time if tho iwrs11n <'tlf.illP<1 to preference 1ile with the clerk u n·111111ciation lhf·reof in writing.

The probate comt. had no authority to issue letters or administrat.ion to defenclant within thirty days after the den.tll of the deceased without first having receiYed

r;3

plaintiff's written re11nnciatio1~ o_f her. right: The ~·ight of the lrnsbn.m1 or wife to n<l1111111ster 1s their sole right, and without their renunciation cannot Le di vhled with

others. In JS:lO n ntl '40, the provisions or the statute wrre

snbstantially t11e same as at 11resent., and it was 11eltl in JlullttnZJli?I v. St. Lnuis Col{nty Court, (.i Mo. 2D1, to be "a most unwarrantable a.et in the county court tu grant letters of aclminist.ration to a stranger * * * before the lapse of sixty <lays from the death of the intestate, or before the other recinisites of the statute }mu been complied with." See, also, Schou}er's Ex' rs and Adm' rs, sec. 113. This anthor says the remmciation shonld be ma<le a matter or record, and our statute supra, in order to avoid nll qnp~tion or dispute as to whether the I>re­ferrecl pa.rties ha<l waiv<'l1 tl1eir rights, re11uires the renunciation to he in writing and filetl with the court.

I have no doubt o[ the power and anthority of the probate court to revoke or cancel the 1ett_ers issued to defendant. Among the grounds of revocat.wn, as stated by Schou}er (sec. HiB), are, "t.ltat :'.<lministr:it.i.on was granted earlier t.lin11 the statute permits to one of a cl:1ss not preferre11 thr•rcin; or that it was granted to a11other person than thll witlow or next of kin, regardless of Lhe legal priori ties.'' .

Nor can there he any question of the anthonty of the court to do this nt a subsequent term. It is not necessary, in tliis case, to say 1he appointment wa~ voicl, but tl1at it was an irregnlarity patent of record there

. can be no clonht., and in such cases comts may set aside judgment or other proceedings at a.ny time ':'ithin three

. years. Downin.<7 1,. Sti11, 4 B l\f o. nnn ; Smdh v. Bcs.t, 42 Mo. 181i; Jlarbnr ·11. Railrvrtd, :12 Mo. 4~:~; Ra11km t>. Lawton, 17 Mo. App.- fl7-L

The ju<lgment, \\"ith the concnl'l'ence of the othe1· judges, is aflirmed.

NEOSHO SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES

~

Benton School about 7 909- 7 9 7 0

77

Lela Shounick, Opal Richards, Eva Hargrove, Hazel King, Ruby Haskens, Beulah Bloomer. Agnes McKnight, Helen Rushmore, Monroe Collier, Earnest Denton, Kenneth Ludiker, Alfred Briggs, Earl Cunningham, Bryan Martin, Earnest Evertt, Horace Peters, Elmo Brumback, Laura Jones, Christine Cravens, Mildren Wineteer, Mary Anna Wills, Eva Bowers, Anna Shounick. Kathrine Hubbard, Eleanor Shartel, Myron Calkins, Elzy Richards, Willar Jackson, /Prof Mit­dieii]Prof Veerkamp./ (Caption reversed $°.vi/.)

2-Neosho Dafiy News Thursday, August

THE NEOSHO DAILY NEWS The date missing from this clipping from the Neosho Daily News would have read "August 27, 1953."

The Neosho Dally News Is an independent Ne..-spap~,. prlntlll IJllpartially, supporting what it believes to be r ight at.d opposi: It believes to be wrong, without rt\gard tor party politics.

Howard L. Bush ... ...... ........................................ .. .... .. ..... .... Publi> 8ubacrtptlon Ratea: By mail. In Newton and McDonald counf

;pear; elsewhere, $9.00 per year ; l>y city carrier or. Po~toftice b month: $10.00 per vear. ·

Pul>lished evenings, Monday throUJh Friday and Sunday morn Sa.et Hickory Btre~t. Neosho. Missouri, and entered at th·e . Neosh Jaa. 10., 1906, aa second class mail nnder act o{ <:OYlgress of Ma

Remember Forty Years Ago

Aug. 27, 1913 At the meeting of the school

board held here last night. Miss Marie Claire Walker of Columbia, was elected as head of the teach­ers training course to be added to our schools this year. Her sal­ary will be $90 a mo.nth. . . . A contract for 200 tons . of coal was awarded the Robinson Davis · Lumber Company, whose bid was $3.40 per ton for fancy screen lump.

When? Professor Veerkamp called the

teachers of the city together at 1 a.m. at the Central Schpol build­ing. All the members of the school board were present, rep­resentatives of the Mothers Club, visiting patrons and ministers. Prof. Veerkamp made one of the most sensible and practical talks ever heard here, which evidenced the fact that he is a master of his profession. Several short ad­dresses were made. It was a profitable meeting.

4-45

4-46

4-47

· ..z< I '. . . ~t .- ~t ~-.