Sacramento daily record-union., 1890-04-17
lAHGER HENLEY.
THE PRESSURE HE USED TO NEGo.
TIATE SOME STOCK.
Attorney Holl Says 1t Was BIackmail-
Lively Case In Justices
Court.

Some rather startling disclosures ar,
often-iimes made in the most innocent
looking and apparently urimportant civi
case. in the Justices Courts. A strikip,
illustration of this fact was given yester
day in Justice Henry's Court.
Early in October of last year Charles H
Gilman, proprietor of the Red House, wa.
the owner Of twenty shares of Mechanics
Building and Loan stock, which he wanted
to get rid of. He did not expect to sci
them at the rate of 100 cents on the dollar
but wanted to get as much as he could or
them. He consulted with William Hen
ey, attorney at-law, about the matter, and
Henley agreed to make the dicker for him
Tor good commission. A contract wa
drawn up and signed, whereby Henle,
agreed to sell the stock, with the under
standing that he would be paid when hs
did-if he did not, no pay
Six months elapsed, and Henley had moi
succeeded in disposing of the stock. Gil
man then took the matter in hand an6
sold IL himself. Henley demanded his
commission just the same, though, main
thoL uO IlgDI inter
tere IN the matter. Gilman refused. ane
Henley brought suit in the Justices Conr
to recover 5000, the agreed commission.
The case appeared to be a very ordinary
ana unlmportant one, as the above facts
show. But it turned out to be rather in.
teresting.
ATTORNEY ANDERSON wITHDRAws.
The case came up for hearing before
IuStiP6 nf rho p1ano
noon. Henley was represented by w. A.
Anderson and ex-Judge BlanchsrI. while
5. Scion Holl appeared for the defendant
Gilman.
denIey took the witness stand, but had
only given portion of his testimony when
attorney Anderson left the Court-room
Withdrawing from the case.
Henley proceeded to testify that after
contracting with Gilman to dispose of the
stock he set about Immediately to carry il
put. He learned that James l. Felter was
one OF the Directors in the Mechanics
Building and Loan Association, and for
certain reasons concluded to have Mr.,
Felter buy the stock. He brought consid.
cradle pressure to bear on Mr.. Felter, but
the latter was stubborn and refused to buy
the shares.
II called on Mr.. Felter probably fifty
times, since that contract was entered into, u
sald Henley, "and tried to effect a settle
ment with him, but failed never ne.
elected the matter. On March 9th. how
ever, Gilman sent note to me asking for
his book-his account book with the Asso.
clation-and | returned it to him. We met
on the street and went to Felter's place to.
gether. Felter then said he would buy the
stock at the rate of sixty-fi five cents, and
would give me ten cents on the dollar as
my commission. | thought then that il
was al settled. We agreed to call around
the next day and consummate the sale
Before the next day arrived, however, Gil.
man lost his heart and refused to sell. He
didn't ike the 10 per cent. business which
| was to get. Shortly afterward. however
he sold the stock on his own hook. and
when asked hiIa for my fee he told me
hadn done anything for it, and was not to
get d--n cent"
THE PRESSURE" REVEALED.
The first question attorney Holl put tc
Henley, on cross-examination, was: "What
effort dld you make to carry out the terms
of your contract with Gilman"
Henley went on and reiterated what he
had previously stated regarding his many
visits to Mr.. Felter's office, and his fire.
quent lmportunings of the latter to buy the
sock.
MIR. Holl then wanted to know WHY Mr.
Felter bad been picked out as the object Of
Henley's importunings.
well, replied Henley, with all the
GOODNESS Imaginable, II knew that Felter
was one of the Directors in the association
and might be buyer on that account
Furthermore, Mr.. Felters son-in-law, Mr.
Parsons, who was formerly the Secretary OF
the association, was reputed 10 be de.
faulter, and threatened to have him prose
cuted for embezzlement if Felter did MOI
pay the money"
well" said Mr.. Holl, looking rathe,
surprised, had you investigated Mr.. Par
sons affairs sufficiently to warrant you il
making snch threats?"
Il had" was Henleys cool reply.
Attorney Blanchard at this point OBJ
jected TO any testimony about Parsons, say
ing that 1t was irrelevent, and had nothing
to do with the case.
Mr.. Holl said he proposed to show tha
Henley had never attempted 10 sell tn,
stock in proper manner. I'VE will show
by his own testimony" said he, "the ille
gItimacy Of his operations. 1t looks like
CASE OF BLAcKMAIL
To me-Yery much so-hence l want tc
show il all up. | will snow that in the
manner in which he did proceed be could
never have collected any money legiti
matelv."
Mr.. Blanchard insisted that the testi
mOny was incompetent.
Attorney Holl went after Henley again
I'm order" he said, "for this man to have
collected money from Felter he woulC
have had to depend altogether on Parson.
guilt. l say it is not legitimate name
in which TO transact business, and poo
method en- which to demand compensa
tion.n
Judge Henry then took hand in th
matter. He said he did not see the neces
sity of going into the particulars of th
Parsons affair, but he did wish complet
statement from Henley in regard to how
he expected 10 collect the money from
Felter.
Henley accordingly explained as follows
Il was satisfied that Parsons could be sue
cessfully prosecuted for embezzlement.
was as satisfied of that as | was that b
was Felter's son-in-law. Gilman had toi
me not 10 go TO the expense of bringing
suit in equity so l thought that the easies
way 10 gel at it would be the best. an
went after Feiter. / expected that h
would rather settle than to bring the dis
grace upon his family, which prcsecntio
of his son.in- law would necessarily entai
/ bothered him TO such an extent, as Felte
himself said, that he felt sick when he sa-
me coming into his office"
SOARING PROCESS.
What other means did you resort to,
order to get the money! asked attorne
Holl.
None, replied Henley.
All You did, then, was 10 scare Felter,
suggested Mr.. Holl, sarcastically.
"If you want to put i. that way--yes,
was Henley snappish reply. 81 have tol
you what did" he went on, land no
you can apply vour own terms TO it,
Mr.. Blanchard apparently felt SOM
what anxious for his client, realizing, as b
did, that Henley had seriously put hi
foot in il" Mr.. Holl bad announced th,
he had finished with the cross. exsmin.
ton, so Mr.. Blanchard essayed to sa,
his client.
Now, Mr.. Henley" he said. you don
mean to say. do you, that you threatene
Mr.. Felter with the imprisonment of b
son-in-law, if he (Felter) did not come
an agreement with your
Henley saw the force of his attorney
question.
'No-not exactly" he replied, slowl,
at was Mr.. Gilman who was eager to hay
me proceed against Parsons"
We'll, did you ever threaten NJ
Felter?"
mo, sir; did not"