The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-13
SHUT OUT OF THE COURT,
DR.. Arthur Marten Can No
Longer Practice as an
Attorney.
Judge Coffey Takes Exception to a
Remarkable Document in the
JosseIyn Case.

JOSSelyn Case.
DR.. Arthur Marten undertook to revise
the Superior Courts methods of making
up briefs. He threw literature and feeling
into a document that he presented before
Judge Coffey yesterday, and the Judge
threw him out of court, so far as the right
to future practice goes.
It was in the guardianship hearing rela-
tive to Lulu Josselyn that this happened.
Miss Josselyn is a 15-year-old girl who
resides at SIS Bush street. in the home of
George Staacke. The latter is a member
of the firm of Thomas Bell e. Co., and be
is described as the girls adopted grand
father" Some time ago petition was
made to have General John McComb ap-
pointed guardian of Miss Josselyn, and DR..
Marten, as guardian of Alma Josselyn, an
older sister of the girl to whom the case
relates, took hand in the proceedings by
filing partially adverse petition.
Miss JosseIyn went from the Staacke
home to Fresno while the guardianship
hearing was pending. DR.. Marten and
some of the others contended that she had
been taken away to avoid the legal pro-
ceedings, and one of the questions that
Judge Coffey is now trying to determine is
whether Mr.. Staacke or anybody else con-
cerned in the care of the girl took her to
Fresno with the Intention of getting her
beyond the Jurisdiction OF the San Fran
cisco court.
All the main points of the case are yet to
be determined, for most of the time at yes
terday's hearing was taken up with DR..
Marten and his brief. Judge Coffey de-
clared the document to be the most re-
markable he had ever seen. As brief in
the case it was clearly too long, the Judge
said. It went too much into literature and
dealt more with Mr.. Staacke and his attor-
nev, Davis Louderback, than with the law
which it was supposed to set forth.
In a sort of review of the whole case DIR.
Marten said:
Davis Louderback, attorney for respondent,
opposed the appointment of guardian, opened
iTnnrmediatelv peaceful negotiations and entered
upon a campaign of delays for wicked and SIN
lister purposes, and other vexatious and objec;
tionable tactics best known TO counsel engaged
in the legal kalsomining business
Further it is stated that on March 81,
1894, when a hearing was given, Louder
back did not attempt to convince the court
that respondent was fit and proper per-
son, entitled to the custody of the minor,
but
With an expression of infantile innocence on
his otherwise matured countenance advanced
the astonishing claim that said minor had left
spondent was served with the citation.
And then the brief continued through
many typewriter pages:
Considering that the learned counsel only
shortly before had proclaimed, through the
medium of the daily press, that he would
prove that there never was such child as
Lulu Josselyn in respondents house, the beau
tiful inconsistency of his admission that said
child left ten days before these proceedings
were instituted must have been superinduced
v<fr mt hLvT
Yerted truthfulness in state OF convalescence,
and while counsel did not attempt to proffer q
rational solution OF the problem OF her being
simultaneously present in Fresno County and
at the residence of respondent-an accomplish
ment of existence heretofore only attributed
or conceded to the Mahatmas, to whom space
is no obiect-her presence here ana absence
from Fresno County involuntarily connects
the subject with sleight-of-hand perform
ance over which even Hermann, the magician,
would have no cause to blush.
Instead OF promptly and respectfully comply
ing with the order OF the court to produce the
minor at the day of hearing counsel Tor re-
spondent, with crocodile tears in his eyes, met
aphorically speaking, and as II ne mad never
troubled the waters of yonder brooklet, finally
pleaded that it would be great hardship to
have the minor produced in court, as she had
no money, and she and her friends were too
poor 10 cover the expense of her attendance in
court without offering an explanation at
whose charitable disposition she was enabled
to mysteriously take her departure for the
more congenial cline of Fresno.
The ordinary lawyer, wishing to call the
counsel on the other side Police Court
practitioner, usually does so in plain legal
terms, but ID. V. Marten more ceremoni-
ousiy described an attorney as accustomed
to tactics emitting the nauseating effluvia
of the quarters where the hobo and the
drunkard find their recreation"
The Supreme Court was not left out of
the general consideration, and with an
abandon that might be considered risky in
Grand Jury, the physician said, concern
ing delay In an expected habeas corpus
decision:
The court has placed this case on the re-
served calendar In anticipation OF a speedy
decision of the habeas corpus cases before the
Supreme Court, but said cases were signed and
submitted on the 9Th day of december, 1894,
and before decision was handed down, the
Supreme Ruler sent mis- messenger, death, with
a writ of intervention and took the child in
dispute.
Judge Coffey was treasured that he had
power to deal with the case before him.
DR.. Marten saying:
In conclusion, we venture to think that this
honorable court is clothed with ample power
TO afford immediate relief in the case which
the solemnity of justice demands and the NAL
esty of the law !ustif1es.
The Judge concluded that he had power
in the case and he exercised portion of it
in Immediately disbarring Dr. Marten.
rive cannot have the court records in
numbered with documents of this kind"
be said, in finally disposing of the matter.
stYou must not appear any more as an at
torney before this court. Be seated, DR..
Marten."
But DR.. Marten says that he proposes to
"bring Judge Coffey before the Supreme
Court on writ of mandamus." Why or
how he does not state, but he declares that
he was educated in the law while student
in Europe. more than twenty years ago.