The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-11-23
PATRICK MUST ANSWER.
CHARGES PREFERRED LOOKING TO
ais DIsBARMENT.
Alleging That In Claiming to be Anxious
curae he Deceived The Court, as In Fact
he Was Prosecuting Hutcheson
For q Fee

GALVESTON, Nov. 1.-THE follow.
ing citation, which explains itself, was
filed by United States District At.
torney R. E. Hannay in the circuit
court of the United States for the east.
ern district of Texas, sitting at Gal
weston:
To the Hon. Alex Boarman Judge:
In accordance with the suggestion
of this honorable court, made and
entered on the 10Th of November, of
record wherein the court found that
Albert 7. Patrick, a practicing at
torney of this court, had on the 4th
day of November, $685. filed in this
court charges, preferred by him as
relator and amicus curae, against J. @.
Hutchinson, practicing attorney of
this court, which charges this honor
able court found wholly unfounded
and unsupported after full inquiry.
and the court further found that said
charges were presented by said Albert
L. Patrick under the guise that he
was friend of the court and without
fee or other motive than from the high
moral and disinterested purpose of
purging the bar of dishonorable and
unworthy member. And to an iute1ro.
CATION from the court at the time the
motion was set for hearing, said Pat.
rick expressly stated that he had no
fee. or retention to move against said
j. y. Hutchinson, nor was he moved by
any malice or other improper motive.
And, whereas, the court after hear
ing the evidence was of the opinion.
and did tind and adjudge that in said
answer of said Albert Il. Patrick, he
did not disclose the truth to this court.
but the court found in the following
language And it further appearing
to the court that the recitation in said
motion made by the said Albert Il.
Patrick that he appeared herein. as
amicus curae and that his answer = to
the interrogatory of the court that he
was not employed or otherwise inter-
ested in the presentation of said mo-
ton than as a friend of the court and
diSinterested member of the bal is
not true i'll TACT, but it appearing to
this court that the said Albert L Pat
rick was in truth and in fact, hired
and employed to present the said
charges, it is therefore suggested by
this court that the district attorney of
the United States do prepare and pre-.
sent against said Albert 7. Patrick a
motion charging him with fraudulent
and dishonorable conduct and NAL
practice in thus misleading this court
In regard to his relation and motives
in the presentation of said unjust
charges"
Now, therefore, | do present that
said Albert 7. Patrick was, and is
guilty of fraudulent and dishonorable
conduct and malpractice in thus de-
ceiving and misleading this court in
regard to his relation and motives in
the presentation of said unjust charges
in the language quoted from the de-
cree as herein before stated.
That the said Albert T. Patrick was
hired and employed to present and
prosecute said motion to disbar j. 9.
Hutchinson, Notwithstanding he stated
to the contrary. That said Patrick
was actuated by hatred. malice and
hope of reward and not as amicus
curae. That the said Albert 7. Pat
rick be cited to show cause on such
charges so presented why he should
not be disbarred and stricken from the
rolls of this court, and his license to
practice herein revoked as provided in
articles 228 to 23l of the Revised stat.
utes of the State of Texas.
Attorney Hannay said the trial of
Patrick for disbarment would not
come up for hearing at the present
term of court, which would adjourn
but would be heard during
the February term when Patrick
would be given ample opportunity to
show cause why he should not be dis
barred for malpractice.