The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-11-27
GEORGE WHITE DISPUTED.
His Version of the Contempt Case
Reviewed by Attorney
Linforth.
The Round Valley Kings Lame Leg
Helped Him to Continuance
of the Case.

George E. Whites version of the pro-
ceedings in contempt of Judge Hebbard' s
| court, for which he is paying part of the
penalty in the County Jail, was yesterday
disputed in part by w. H. Linforth, one
of the attorneys (being associated with At
torney Highton) for Mrs. frankie White.
Mr. Linforth read THE CALLS exclusive in
terview with White with uncommon in
terest. He expressed some surprise at
what he termed the peculiar inference that
might be gained from the statements OF
the King of Round Valley.
White also read with considerable in.
terest the story which he had himself told
and was quite well pleased with the &C.
curacy of it's reproduction.
81 might be little more explicit" be
said, lin the matter OF value of my
property. The referee placed it at about
$500, 000 estimating my debts at S13O, DOC
$4,000 to $4,000, out of which Mrs.
White was decreed 100000"
After meditating few seconds, he
added: well, don't know but $4,000
would be nearer right. Really, l do not
believe the property worth more than
$4,000 after ded ucting the debts. How
ever. the referees report, and not my
opinion, formed the basis of the court
action"
But this difference in the estimate of
value of the property was matter OF no
particular Importance to Mr.. Linforth.
The difference of opinion between the
referee and White he did not consider Of
any particular consequence. He said:
desire to correct misconstruction that Is
made by White as to the actual proceedings in
contempt. His statement would lead to the
belief that he was adjudged in contempt for
failing to appear in court on the day set for the
hearing of the contempt. To be sure, he refers
evasively to the real matter of contempt, which
was the leasing of his property to Rohrbough-
not Rohrer, as he is sometimes called.
Whites statement that Judge Hebbard
would not look at the certificate of DR.. Bellamy
nor at the wound were trivial thing but for
the inference that it carries. The record of
the court will show the exact facts, and that
is the best evidence in this matter. The or
der to show cause why White should not be
adjudged in contempt was issued upon the
sworn petition of the receiver, Wilson #.
Smith, on April % last, returnable May g.
White received the wound in his leg here in
San Francisco and went to Round Valley after
being hurt, so it was necessary to send the
order to Covelo. his home in Round Valley,
and have it served on him there, which was
done on April %.
When the matter was called for hearing
White was not present in court, but was repre-
sented by his attorneys, Barclay Henley and
of DR.. Bellsmy that White was suffering from
wounded leg and moved for a continuance ON
that ground. We objected. holding that the
plea was sham and that he could have been
here If he wished. But the court would
not listen to us, and the hearing was
continued till May 10. and it was again
continued till May IS, on which date
White was i'll court, then through motions
and demurrers it was carried over till the next
day, when the Judge made the order OF con-
tempt, the penalty OF which was five days in
jail and $500 fine.
AS to Whites statement that Rohrbough did
not even have trial. that is untrue. His case
was taken up first on May 10, and on May 81
the court found him guilty of disobeying the
Whites property and adjudged him in con-
tempt, of which he Is now in Jail, with White,
suffering the penalty.