Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1890-07-15
THE HEwErr ESTATE.
Another Paper Filed-Mr. Sutherland
Says Certain Statements Are ScaudalouS.

In the case Of Laura @. Robinson (nee Hewett),
by her next friend. Edwin Sutherland, guardian,
agt Rachel Hewett, VIZ. and c. w. Hewett E. b
Hay and l. E. Burket for the appointment Of
trustees, charging Encouragement Of the es-
tate Of r. c. Hewett the complainant has, by
Messra Cole 4 Cole fled exceptions to the
answer. The complainant states that the an
swer of Rachel n. Hewett and E. B. Hay is in
many parts impertinent They quote from
the answer clause stating that they were about
10 go into court and ask for such proceedings
as would be necessary for their qualification IS
trustees; that they had requested Mr.. Cook to
prepare the bill. but he failed to do so, and
charging that the guardian had gone out Of his
way to make public examination OF family
affairs and the status Of an incorporation. The
complainant says that this 10 irrelevant and
irresponsive 10 any matter IN the bill.
As TO the clause stating that Col. Cook had
received $1,000 in settlement Of his cause of
Hewett against Gleason, which should have
been paid direct TO the administrators, but has
| credited il on q bill Of charges, he says he was
instructed and agreed that the same should be
paid by check to the order Of W. +. Hewett,
administrator.
He states that the averment that W. F.
Hewett, out OF his own personal means, loaned
money to the Washington ball club is wholly
irresponsive to anything in the bill and relates
vidual actions Of W. +. Hewett about which
defendants, Rachel NJ. Hewett and E. u. Hay,
could have had no knowledge. The statement
as to liabilities of the club at the date of death
OF the testator-S4S, ass. S4-he says Is irrelevant
and impairment, as also the denial that w. +.
Hewett managed the club as he saw fit and the
averment that, as president Of the club, he
sacrificed his business. &c.
Mr.. Sunderland also files exceptions to the
answer, asserting that portions Of IL are scan
dalous citing the clause charging the aIlega-
tions OF the bill Is malicious wrongful uncalled
for and hurtful to the standing and unsullied
reputation Of Mr.. Hewett Also that charging
that he Mr.. Sutherland) was unknown to Mrs
Robinson when, on the advice OF Mr.. Cook, he
was appointed guardian, and that he has made
dissensions in family in which harmony had
existed, and his conduct 10 malicious, annoying
and wrongful, bearing upon its face an endeavor
to involve the estate in litigation.
He submits that these and other extracts are
highly scandalous as respects him and Mr..
Cook, who il not party to the bill, but who
was appointed by the testator to act as counsel
and attorney In the settlement OF the estate.
NJ. Sunderland also files exceptions to the
answer Of W. j. Hewett, charging that certain
portions are scandalous. Among these por-
tions of the statements is one charging that
Mr.. Cook in his advice had not protected the
interests of the estate, but had so managed ID
| as to enrich himself, and another charging on
information and belief that this suit was begun
| at his Cookie instance, that they would be
| compelled to employ him. He says there was no
averment Of the bill justifying this charge. Mr..
Sunderland asks that the case be referred TO
the auditor an examiner to take proof as to
the scandalous matter,