The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-10-24

Potter after the death OF his mother from
what it had been before that event, he was
very particular.
You are lust as certain about that as
you are about all the rest OF this, are your"
he inquired.
al State it as fact" answered Judge
Spencer.
Judge Spencer didn't know exactly.
at was the Goth of September, 1894
wasn't it?"
Yes; think it was"
1t was admitted by the other side that it
was.
Now" said Mr.. PiIlsbury, taking up
the transcript of the accounting case, 81
will submit this record, which bears date
of the 18th of Septem Der. as that on which
the testimony was taken and on which
you say you had this conversation. Will
YOU explain how you could refer TO Mrs.
Lux's death on the 18th when she did not
die till the Goth? ?"
Judge Spencer took the book, exam ined
the date through his carefully adjusted
spectacles and admitted that he could
hardly have done so on that date.
Now" continued Mr.. PiIlsbury, vehe-
mently following up his advantage, "don't
you know that a lawyer has no right to
come into court and tell about converse
sions which he has had with his client in
his relation as counsel?"
L
this instance; he had betrayed no secrets
of client.
when it comes to that, did you not say
to Mr.. Miller that 1t was a - outrage
the way J. II. Campbell, counsel on the
other side in this case, had been conduct
ing the estate, and that you could get him
djsbarred for his conduct"
Here Judge Buck interfered and refused
to allow counsel to go any further on that
line. he said he didn't want to try all the
lawyers on the case.
"You represented Jesse Potter in this
accounting suit, did you not"
Il was employed by CARRIER, Boalt &
Bishop"
They were the attorneys for Potter?"
Yes
"Now, when there was talk of the SUBJ
stitution of another firm for CARRIER. Boalt
& Bishop who suggested the bringing of
this suit against Jesse Potter for his re-
mOVal as EXECUTOR"
Il did"
LAS counsel-while you were still coun-
sci for Jesse Potter-you instigated the
bringing of this suit against your own
client? You and Bishop got together and
cooked up this plan, did your"
Il suggested bringing this suit"
"Who framed the petition for the re-
moval?"
II did, in conjunction with J. H. Camp
bell at his office in San Jose"
Judge Spencer said he had several con-
versations with Henry Lux about the
management of the estate, and said to
him that the time would come when
Jesse Potter would have to be removed
or the settlement of the estate would be
blocked.
The original drafts of the petition were
called for, and at the opening of the after
noon session they were produced and sub
mltted to him for examination.
The papers petitioned for the removal of
Jesse Potter as executor of the estate and
that James Grove be substituted, and that
said Grove be empowered to proceed in
the case against Miller for the accounting.
And you were the attorney of record or
counsel for Jesse Potter in that case, were
YOU not?"
II was. have said so many times?"
"Who suggested your going to Mr..
Campbell and framing this petition?"
Carbohydrates it was Mr.. Campbell.
l may have invited myself. Yes, l spoke
to Mr.. Bishop of there being a movement
on foot to substitute Page & Eels for
CARRIER, BOalt d Bishop, which firm |
represented"
The draft of the order of court, which
Judge Spencer said he also prepared, was
submitted, the language of which repre-
protligate, drunkard, and that he had
committed frauds OF the estate, and for
those reasons was removed.
In answer to questions, the witness re-
lated a conversation with Mr.. Bishop, in
which he Judge Spencer) tried to induce
Henry Miller to buy out the interest of
Lux; that he declined, because he was
not able. Mr.. Miller was DESTROYS of form
ing corporation.
He then went over the ground covered
in his direct testimony-how he had then
suggested to Miller that Potter be placed
on salary again and that Miller refused,
declaring that Potter was an embezzler
and no good.
question was put as to whether he had
said anything about Mr. Delmas or Mr.
Campbell in the matter.
The objection was sustained. Mr. Del
mas then took the witness and put the
question, did you ever say anything to
me about that case?" The witness said be
had never spoken to Mr.. Delmas on this
matter until day before yesterday.
A question as to what motive Judge
Spencer had in suggesting the removal of
Jesse Potter as executor provoked a dis
cussion as to the right to inquire about
motives.
MIR. Delmas said that the questions of
the other and the manner of putting them
implied that the witness had done dis
honorable thing. A motive is a fact; he
had right to state it. The question had
implied that Judge Spencer was or mad
been counsel for Jesse Potter and that as
such he had no right to come here and
testify against him. that he had instigated
this proceeding for his removal through
mercenary motives; that the retention of
Potter as executor meant the loss by this
witness of profitable professional business.
Therefore, he should in justice be per-
United to state what his motives were.
Mr.. Pillsburv said the witness was coun-
sci for Jesse Potter, admittedly so, and he
should have been prevented by the court
from testifying to those things which he
learned as such counsel, as the communi-
cation of client to counsel; no court of JUS
tfee should have permitted him to do so;
he should have been stopped; it was I'M
heard Of; the fact stood for itself and no
questions had been put on their side as to
motives as none were necessary; he should
not be allowed to give any reasons for what
he had done.
Judge Spencer said he desired to make
statement in justice to himself, and on
that ground the court permitted him to
do SO.
81 wish to say, in the first place, that l
was never the attorney for Jesse Potter
in anything in the world, and never recog-
nized him as such. l represented CARRIER,
Boalt & Bishop as counsel for the exec
utor. After the death of Mrs Lux l be-
IL