Arizona weekly citizen., 1888-06-09
TO DISBARAN ATTORNEY
HORACE BELL BRINGS CT RGEs
 AGAINST c. c. STEPHENS.

He is Charged With Moral rurpitude and
 With the Violation of III Oath as an At
 torGey-A Complete Resume of A very To-
 trrssting Msitsr-rhs Grounds Upon
 Which Compartments ChaTy.s are Based
 Stephens Ordered 10 Appear and show
 Cause
 Considerable exotic ment WAS caused in legal cIrcles yesterday by the fling by Horace Bell, before Jndse Hutton, in Department Four of the Superior Co Irt, or B "a ger asking that O. U. Stephens, the well-kuown attorney, be disbsrred. The paper states, nrst, that the complainant, Is an attorney -st-lsv, prscticing In the Superior Court Of Los Angeles county, and says that on the first day of Decem- Der, 1887, there was pending before the Sdpenor Court two Gases charging B. A. Stephens and A, Nj. Thornton with the crime of criminal libel; one of these cases was appealed to the Superior Court, snC the decision being reversed, was again sent down for trial 10 the lower court, that O. O. Stephens vss brother to B. A. Stephens, one of the defendants iu the causes aforesaid: that or the first day of December c, O. Stephens came to the complainant. Horace Bell, and said that G. Wiley Wells was the guilty party in the matter of the criminal libel before mentioned, and that be, Wells, had in- veigled my fool brother into the thing; that c, O. Stephens had told Bell thai they were not prepared 10 give Wells away. and, it is charged further, pro posed to Bell that if he would cease Co prosecute B, A, Stephens, be woul1 fur nish sufficient evidence to convict Wells of the offense. This proffer Bell says he accepted, the documentary evidence be- ing furnished Co him on December 18th On that day O. c. Stephens, it is alleged urged Bel to have Wells arrested, vo- lunteering 70 testify against him in the matter, and Bell followed this advice, after consultation with the district sttor- ney-gettIng his son, O. A. Bell, to swear to a complaint charging Wells with the cnme. On this complaint, complainant states a warrant was duly issued, snd Bn attempt made to arrest Wells, who was then on his way out of t6e State-and mean while the case against B. A. Steph- ems was held in sbeysnce, Bell saying that he confided in the promises made 10 him by O. c. Stephens. In January, 1888, the complaint continued. o. C. | Stephens again came to Bell to have the case agsInst his brother continued, and | at that time showed Bell letter, pur. porting to have been written by Wells, | in which instructions were given to B. A. | Stephens iD the matter of perpetrstlng 2 the criminal libel upon Bell. The charge IS made that it was agreed at that time that B, A. Stephens would go upon the stand and testify that Wells was the author of the letter, thus securing bis conviction. The case was, accordingly, again continued. It is charged further that on March 20. 1888, Wells was arrest ed on 6 warrant sworn out before Judge Fancy, charging him with criminal libel. and had his examination before thst ma gistrste: that at the preliminary exami- nation of Wells, c. c. Stephens appear ed for the defense of Wells, and acted iD all matters ne.lsiniog to the defense as | tAs attorney for Wells.
 The complainant therefore 1rays thst | O. O. Stephens be cited tefOi. the court to show cause why be sbou.l not be stricken from the rolls of said court ss an attorney oi the court
 Immediately upon the filing ot the paper, Judge Hutton made an order cit ing O. 0. Stephens to appear before him at 10 6 m on Monday, June lOsb, to show cause why his name should not be stricken from the rolls of the court, and the order was given to Sheriff ksys for service,-L. A. Tribune.