National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1881-01-26
JUDGE SMELLS POWERS.
The Question Raised to Whether He
Can Disbar an Attorney.

Can Disbar an Attorney.
Some six weeks ago Mr.. II. H. Wells, jr., was
charged in the Police Court with unprofessional
conduct i'll receiving two silver watches from Ed
ward Brien with the promise that he would put the
watches in pawn and pay the fine and have Brien
released, which he failed to do, and Brien was
compelled to go to the wOrkhouse.
The matter was referred to board of examiners
consisting of McSsTS. James z. Hayden, James E.
Padgett, and Daniel Z. Cahill. The former submit
ted minority report recommending the dismissal
Of the charges. The other two gentlemen submit
ted a brief statement without any recommends
tons.
Judge Smell reviewed the reports last Monday
and issued an order suspending Mr. Wells from
practice before the court for SIX months.
Yesterday afternoon Mr.. H. H. Wells, ST., and
C. Maurice Smith appeared before His Honor to
ask for q further hearing of the case.
Mr. II. H. Wells, ir., presented his petition asking
the court TO set aside the order OF dfsbarring on
the following grounds:
]. That this court had no jurisdiction to make
the Judgment or order referred to, the respondent
being an attorney of the Supreme Court of the
District of Columbia and of the Supreme Court of
the United States, and because this court has in
fact no power to admit any attorney to practice,
nor to exclude any duly admitted attorney from
pTacticing therein.
2. That the supposed order and Judgment referred
to is illegal and void because it docs not specify
on its face any cause reason for such suspension
1t does not appear, and was not. in fact for any
contempt of court or any alleged misbehavior in
tbeprescnce OF the court but was solely the COM
plant Of private person for alleged injustice done
70 him.
s. Because the said supposed judgment was ex
parte, without notice or trial or any opportunity
of making defense, and found the respondent
guilty and punished him without any personal
knowledge the part of the court of the truth of
the.alleged facts and circumstances.
4. Because no charges or specifications embody-
ing any statement of any crime, misdemeanor or
other Oiense known TO the law were ever filed or
served upon the defendant.
5. Because duly admitted attorneys at law hold
their Office during good behavior and can only be
deprived Of 1t for misconduct ascertained, unless
done in the presence Of the court, by proper and
legal trial in court, at which the respondent has
right TO produce his witnesses and be heard in per-
son and by counsel.
G. Because the said order is Illegal and void in
that it undertakes to suspend the respondent from
all right 10 practice for the period of six months
while the right to suspend for any period if it ex
lists at ALL includes the right TO suspend indefinitely
which is equivalent to total disbarring of the re-
spondent. Said motion will be founded on the aft
daYit fled herewith.
Arguments were made by the counsel and at the
conclusion the court set aside the judgment, re-
marking that it would consider the matter as if
nothing had been done. The hearing was then set
down for week from Saturday next.