#44
Berlin, September 8, 1865

My dear Ferdinand!
In reference to my last letter, I can not give you the best results with regards to your affair. A court such as that in Frankfurt, and a personnel such as the one there is not easily found again.
To be in court on the 5th of the month, at 9:00am sharp, I had to ride over the night before, because no train arrives there in the morning in time. That done, I viewed the property early that morning with a few friends from Frankfurt. According to their knowledge of the place, the same has been sold three thousand Thaler too low, then again, it is a mere construction site just now, terribly run down, and for this reason I suppose, other buyers stayed away. The sale has been completed for now, and there is nothing that can be done about it.
9:00am sharp, I was at the court. After I had waited there by myself for about 1 hours, which cant be forgiven - I wanted to complain, etc. which I did, but what good does that - appeared your brother-in-law Birkholtz, a little later the court scribe, the judge, your brother-in-law Noack, two attorneys, one summoned by the court for the Birkholtz children, one Christiani for Mrs. Noack. After the former for the Birkholtz children declared that he was authorized and directed to receive the purchase funds, the debate began. Birkholtz declared that he did not need to document the purchase funds, since he is the father and natural guardian, and also that he did not re-marry. He debated to and fro, and the session took a wrong turn right away. Well, Noack and his attorney were of the same opinion, and the childrens lawyer declared he would have to get further authorization from the probate court and petitioned for a new session, and that Birkoltz should be charged with sorting the matter out. Now I began to protest, and was looked at with big eyes. I showed my summons, in which it says that the purchase funds are to be documented and distributed. The judge countered that by saying a documentation was to take place, but not a distribution. If this appears on the summons, it was a mistake (great!), but if I do not agree with this, I may feel free to file a complaint. Now I was asked to produce my power of attorney. After it was read several times by several parties, it was - think of that! - declared insufficient, because the notarization there was done by an embassy clerk. This is, according to the views of the court, a much too inferior person to notarize powers of attorney. Just think of that! To my remark that I have had the power of attorney examined by a notary public, who declared it to be valid, I received the reply that they didnt have to care about that. I demanded now to either discard or accept my power of attorney. In one case, I would have had no business at the session, in the other, I would be a full p
arty to it. After fierce debate, I was admitted with the condition of having the power of attorney notarized after the fact by a higher ranking person than an embassy secretary. I find this to be the shortest and quickest way, for if I launch a complaint, it would take much longer.
Presently, the session continued. Your brother-in-law Birkholtz now payed his 2700 Rt., as the portion that is about yours. To pay anything further, he deemed not to be his obligation, since the 500 Rt. that his wife had received according to the will, and which you and Noack are to receive now up front [] according to which he would have to pay more now, he doesnt believe to be obliged to that. Therefore, it was noted by the court, that your brother-in-law Birkholtz has not completely documented the purchase funds, and that a new session is to be set, further that the monies payed are to be part of the Jahn estate and be used to further process the inheritance, and that the attorney of the Birkholtz children shall obtain further authorization.
Of course, everybody was fine with this, I saw the joy of your brother-in-law and disappointed him and everybody else dearly, because I saw that there was no money to be had here after all, only long-winded court procedures. Because I was asked to sign off on this, and to not cheat you out of anything and because the purchase funds could not be documented right, I petitioned for re-subhastation, that is, the repeated auction of the property, at your brothers-in-law cost. Birkholtz wanted to get the 2700Rt back, this was denied by the court, I wouldnt have allowed it, either, and these funds will cover any loss incurred by the repeated auction, though it will probably not come to that.
But you should have seen the faces on these gentlemen after I made my request. It was in order, though, and was the only satisfaction for your dear relatives [] these judges. Before I had confered with your brother-in-law quite amiable. If Birkholtz will not clear the matter of the 500 Rt up on his own, he will need to be sued. Whatever other funds he owes you, he will most likely pay, otherwise you have no other recourse here than sueing him.
The same also told me that your brothers[-in-law?] placed a levy on your wifes funds, but this I doubt, since there is no lawful way of doing it, but a Miss Steinhoff, Kranzstr. 46 supposedly did the same for the amount of 900 Rt. This lady was present during the session, I will get back to this later.
Regarding your other matter, I have not heard, but doubt strongly that any levy is proven and executed, this has to be qualified according to the law first.
There is nothing that can be done at this moment, as much as I wanted to send you the money. However, [ ] has to happen soon, so that this can be put to rest, and for that purpose the following is necessary: Have the enclosed power of attorney notarized by the ambassador himself, or at least by his first secretary, such that it certifies that the original embassy clerk was assigned and empowered to notarize the document, so that your signatures are thus authenticated again by a higher ranking official. The ambassador or his deputy are sufficient, the law prescribes that notarized powers of attorney of a ambassador or resident are satisfactory. Then return this power of attorney to me as soon as possible, I will then petition the court at once to make way for the re-subhastation if Birkholtz does not document the purchase funds within 4 weeks time, which is granted him by law, and that your wifes inheritance will be paid out as soon as possible.
I believe to be able to achieve this soon [ ] however, time it will take with such a court in any case. I will then also see at once if Birkholtz has settled the other matter agreeably, or if it is necessary to sue. Just get me the power of Attorney like that, I wont let myself get drawn into any sort of confiscation. But tell me frankly and honestly if your dear wife has co-signed anything with anybody, and in what amount. Miss Steindorff said that this was the case with her; write me everything, because your wife will have to state this, and it is possible that that money will be confiscated, but it is also possible that [Noack] has to sue first.
I have told Miss Steinhoff that I will visit her as soon as I receive the letter from you. She doesnt seem to be so vicious, write me your opinion on this. Maybe I can straighten the thing out with her, as you see fit. Show me the [ ] and if your wife has obligations elsewhere.
I hope you are all healthy. Here pretty much everybody is. Last week our Elise was very ill. God heard our prayers and has seen to her recovery. Nothing shall be left undone in your matter. If I can not do this or that properly, I have a capable lawyer in Frankfurt, and also those from before.

Respectfully,

A. Schuber