The record-union., 1894-10-15

soy ~ SolIy Oh the saunlinlSbFdLIOL, n0
would expect to receive the commissions,
and thought she fully understood it, for
she replied that it was all right. She had
complained OF being sick and unable to
attend To the business herself, and was
not acquainted in Sacramento.
lie says that when the final account was
drawn he read it over TO her and ex-
planned it, and talked with her about the
commissions, and believed she fully un-
derstood it. She was also present in
court when the account was settled. This
agrees in part with her statements that
there was something said at each time
about the commissions. 1t is true, l
think, that she did not understand fully
about the commissions, or what the law
would allow her tor acting. But that she
ever expected TO receive any of The COM
missions | do not believe, and, on the
contrary, am confident that
SHE KNEW THEY WE'RE TO GO TO RYAN.
This is partly borne out by The fact that
the I'll al settlement was made and the
estate distributed in October 1890. and
she never made any demand on MIR. Ryan,
or in any way claimed the commissions
until alter the matter was brought to her
attention over two years later by Alice,
who seems to have been the aggressive
one and determined to have all slla might
be able TO squeeze out ofthe estate or Ryan,
Claiming, as Annie says she did, that An
ME received more money than she by the
amount OF commissions, thereby show
ing disposition on her part to allow her
cousin nothing for her services as admin
istraLriX. But. be this as it may, when
Ryan discovered there was a misunder-
standing between himself and his client,
or she claimed there was, he returned the
money.
Ryan testified: annie was in court at
the settlement and The commissions were
read to her. 1t was my distinct under
standing that l was To have the COM
missions. There was no concealment.
made full ex planation to her of all the
papers. l retained the commission on
the understanding that | was to have it,
and | was certain she understood the
matter. l talked to her about it at the
beginning, and ut the close" And as to
the $50. he says: ''She expressed wish
to me TO pay Father Grace $50. She left
the money with me 10 pay him. | have
paid him before and since sums of money
tentlon was called To it L thought over it
and saw l had not paid it. / offered TO
pay 1t thcn to Father Grace | wanted
no trouble with these people because they
were my clients and they wero women"
And the paying over of the money,
with interest, Is claimed as strong proof
OF MS guilt in appropriating il. But
there is another light in which this act
can as well be viewed and which is prob
ably the true one. knowing as he must
have known that the relation OF attorney
and client is a tiduciary relation of the
very highest character, and binds the at
torney TO show that his client was fully
informed on all matters pertaining to her
interests, and knowing the agreement
that he should have the commissions was
not evidenced by a witness or instrument
in writing, and denial on her part of
any recollection of such agreement and a
plea Of ignorance on her part as to what
commissions were allowed would all
tend to subject him to the criticism of
having taken all unconscionable adj
vantage OF his client. sick and weak
woman. And knowing this, and that
there was pretended misunderstanding,
and wanting no trouble, because they
were his clients, and women, he paid
over the money, which was the most
honorable and creditable thing he could
have done.
Is there anything in this or all the tes-
tlmony, when taken together, to indicate
that Ryan kept the $50 and the S574 73
willtully and 10 embezzle it? While it is
unfortunate for him that he should have
forgot to pay the so TO Father Grace, as
directed, it does seem to me, from his
own readiness 10 pay over when it was
called to his mind. and his testimony in
guilty or criminal intent that he did not
follow out the wishes OF his client; and
taking all the testimony together, l am
SATISFIED THAT MR.. RYAN TELLS THE
TRUTH
When he says be understood his client
knew in advance that if he won the
contest for her, and did her work in the
administration of the estate, he was to
have the commission due her.
An attorney should not be suspended or
disbarred from the practice of his profess
sion, for which to fit himself he has spent
years OF toll and hard study, unless the
court is clearly satisfied Of his guilt. On
re Houghton, 81 CAL 5ll.)
Ii is true MIR. Ryan knew approxi-
mately just what the commissions would
amount to, and it may be Miss Annie did
not. but in her cross-examination she de-
clares she cared nothing about what she
would be entitled TO as administrators.
for it was her distributive share of the
Armstrong estate she was after. She did
not care to make anything out of it, and
yet think it is clearly shown that she
knew at the commencement that she was
entitled to compensation for admins
tering the estate, and that this comnensa-
tion was commission or a per cent, on
the value of the estate
NoTARY's JURISDICTION.
Some of the papers in the case were
sworn to by Miss Kane i'll San Francisco
before Ryan as a Notary Public. The
latter said he thought he had a right to
do this as a Notary for Sacramento,
Judge Buckles says Ryan was in error in
this, but says:
"Ln view of the fact that no attempt to
conceal the fact of his administering the
oath in San Francisco was ever made. |
am satisfied that he acted in good faith.
wit N w n
no bad motive, and no injury resulting
therefrom."
These proceedings, as held in the case
In re Luce, Mcdonald and Terrence.
50 Cal, page 306, are quasi-crimnal, and
the accused is entitled To the beuetit, not
only of the presumption, but OF such
proof as is made OF good character and
reputation in considering the weight to
be given his own testimony, as we'll as to
such other evidence as may tond to either
create or leave a doubt as to the fact or
intent of his acts.
Were this a case in which the testimony
indicated the guilt of the accused, the evil
dence OF good character for truth and
honesty and integrity, both as a citizen
and a lawyer, Is sufficient not only TO
create strong doubt of his guilt, but to
create the strongest kind OF ofimprobaDility
that young man who has hitherto borne
an enVlaDIe reputation among his neigh
bors, who have known him since bow
hood, and among his brother attorneys.
who have watched his course from the
day he entei Ell law office as a student.
been associated wiki him in practice.
and have observed his behavior before
this court ever since his admission, could
be guilty OF such crimes as those imputed
to him Ill this case.
But the evidence of character is here
wholly unnecessary, for wheil all the
rNfl laaY- n n nFE IsNr |.
fully considered and weighed, as 1 have
endeaYored TO consider and weigh il and