The News-Herald. [volume] (Hillsboro, Highland Co., Ohio) 1886-1973, 1891-07-02
THE D1sBARMENT CASE.
The Charges on Which Il is Sought to
Expel I. =. Vance from the Bar.

The time OF Judge Abernathy, of |
who exchanged places with |
Judge Huggins for the purpose, was oc-
cupied during all of last week by the
hearing Of testimony in the celebrated |
Tom Vance disbarment case, and Mon
day night witnessed the close of the |
arguments of counsel for both prosecu.
ton and defense.
The case is doubtless familiar to most
of the News. HERALD readers from the
fact OF its long pending and our publica-
ton of the sensational happenings in
Clay township out Of which it arose. It
will be remembered that in May, 1890,
several affidavits of people living in
Buford and vicinity were filed with
Judge Higgins in the Common Pleas
Court, charging Vance with a number
OF acts seriously affecting his profession
al standing as a member of the bar. As
required by law in such cases, the court
appointed committee of the bar to in.
vestigate the charges so filed and any
others that might be brought to its at
tention; file the same in proper form
and prosecute them in the Common
Pleas Court. Messrs. T. H. Hogsett, J.
B. Worley and A. Harman constituted
the committee. Nine different charges
were fled against Vance for various acts
of an unprofessional character. Three
of these charges were withdrawn by the
committee before and during the trial,
the courts decision being asked on the
remaining six. Those withdrawn were
in substance:
That, in 1889, Vance had unlawfully
and corruptly stirred up law suit be-
tween Lydia ]. Haines and A. T. Moon,
OF Clay township, with intent to injure
Moon;
That, in 1870, Vance had demanded
and received fees from both parties in a
lawsuit brought by G.. w. Haines, with
Vance as attorney, against Ferdinand
Houck and Bertha Hopkins, which suit
was compromised before the time set
for trial before Squire Martin.
This charge was withdrawn by the
committee after hearing the testimony,
which showed that the case mentioned
in which Vance received fees from
both parties-was compromised few
months before Vance was admitted to
the bar.
That, in 1889, Vance had obtained an
attorney fee from 1. H. Anderson by
falsely representing to Anderson that
he, Vance, had rendered certain services
in lawsuit.
The six charges submitted to the
court on trial were, in substance:
That, in May 1888, while employed
and acting as attorney for Herbert Mob
erly, defendant in a bastardy case,
Heretofore brought by Della Brown, as
plaintiff, Vance persuaded, induced and
procured the said Della Brown to dis
miss the said case against his client,
Herbert Moberly, and to bring bastardy
case against William A. Moberly, in.
stead; Vance we'll knowing that the
complaint in the last mentioned case
would be false;
That, in May, 1883, while employed
by Della Brown to prosecute bastardy
case for her against VIM. A. Moberly
then about to be commenced, Vance
proposed to the said Moberly to act al
his attorney and prevent the said cas'
from being commenced for the sum O
$275, with which he would settle will
the said Della Brown;
That, in June, 1888, while employed
as attorney by Della Brown, plaintiff
in a bastardy case Heretofore brough
by her against VIM. A. Moberly, AM
while such case was pending trial befor
a magistrate, Vance sought and obtaine'
employment as attorney in such cas-
for the said VIM. A. Moberly, defendant
and thereafter acted as his attorney;
That, in 1887, while employed by on
Cynthia Driskill as attorney in the pros
ecution of one T. j. Driskill, for assault
and battery, Vance sought and obtaine
employment as attorney for said t. J
Driskill;
That, in 1887, while employed as al
torney for Henry Ruble against jaime
Grandjohn, and as attorney for Charlie
Pettitory against said James Grandeur
Vance sought and obtained employment
as attorney for said defendant, jaime
Grandeur.
That, in 1887, while employed as a
torney by one H. g. Davis, in the prose
cution of one Henry Grandeur, for n
risting an officer, Vance sought and oil
tanned employment as attorney for sal
Henry Grandeur.
The firms of Steel & Hough and Newb
& Morrow appeared for the defendant
Vance. The trial attracted lare
number of spectators, both from tow
: and country. Aside from the fact th'
it was the first case for the disbarmeI