Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1897-06-09
Mr.. HOXIE'S REPLY.
His Explanation Of the Case on
Which Disbarment Proceed
ingS Are Based.

Grand Rapids, Wis, June 2.-[Spe-
cial. Attorney George Hoxie's answer
in the disbarment proceedings against
him has been fled in Judge Webb's
court Mr. Hoxie admits that he gave
the testimony in the court which is the
groundwork Of the proceedings against
him, but maintains that there was moth
ing unprofessOnal in the action regard
ing which he testified, and sets forth the
circumstances OF the case at length.
Grew Out of the Goldberg Case.
Mr.. Hoxie's difficulty grew out of the
trial Of the Goldberg case at Waupun,
as the public will remember. He is Mr..
Gildberg's stepson and his partner at
Clintonville, and had a hand in several
OF the matters which figure in the
In charge No. I Mr.. Goldberg was ac-
cused of having unlawfully settled a
criminal proceeding inStigated by q Mrs.
Lettie Jonas of ClintonviTle against
Lewis Ruddy and others of the same
place. Mrs. Jonas charged the boys
with having broken into her house with
the intention of assaulting her. and it
was asserted in the charges that Mr..
Goldberg settled the case for S72. On
the trial Mr.. Goldberg showed that the
matter lad been handled by Mr. HOxie
alone, and Mr.. HoXie's admission upon
led to the highly sensational episode
which almost resulted IL his diSbarment
upon the spot Judge Webb to whom
Judge Fish turned the matter over, held
Mr.. HOXie for trial, and the answer was
made to the formal charge.
In the answer Mr.. HOXie states that on
the morning of June IS. 1894, Mrs. Jonas
came TO his office and made complaint
against Lewis Ruddy and two unknown
boys, charging them with having broken
into her house on the previous Saturday
night and attempting an assault upon her.
Upon her statement he drew complaint
charging them with having burglariously
broken into the house and attempted an
assault. He at once turned the complaint
over to Justice Mcneil for the purpose of
having the boys arrested. On the af-
ternOon OF the same day he asserts Mrs.
Jonas returned to the Office and said that
the story she had told i'll the morning was
not true; that all the boys had done was
to kick in side door and break a small
lock. Upon hearing the noise, she said
she had ordered them away, and they had
gone without offering her insult or vio-
lence. She wanted the matter settled. she
said, and would not appear in court
against the boys. Justice Mcneil had
been to her house in the morning to get
her to swear to and sign the complaint,
but she had declined. and, the answer
AYERS. she never did sign or swear to the
complaint.
No Arrests Were Made.
Mr.. HoXie ascertained that Justice Nc
Neil had issued a warrant and he imme-
diately sent word to the officer not to
serve it, and no arrest was ever made.
On the evening of the same day the
young men settled the matter by paying
So, and Mrs. Jonas was entirely salts
fed with the settlement. Mr.. Hoxie as
serts that from the second statement of
the facts he believed the young men had
committed no OffenSe except a bare tres
pass, and that he had a right to settle
Mrs. Jonas claim with them, and he in
sists that it was competent and profess
sonal for him to settle it in the light of
her second statement.
Mrs. Jonas admits that she received
$31 from Mr.. HoXie and was satisfied to
have the case adjusted in that manner.
Out of the balance Mr.. HOxie paid the
costs. and the balance he kept for him
self as attorneys fees.
The HoXie case Will come up for trial
on June 10.