The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1899-09-22

absent from court room No. Monday
afternoon when the disbarment proceed
ings against Attorney Frank P. Kibler
were being heard before Judges Nc
Carly, Smith and Taylor. AS the Sec
ond case of the kind in the history of the
Stark county bar, great interest has
been taken by the legal fraternity in
the proceedings. The charges and
specifications read by Attorney ]. j..
Clark contained a charge of collusion
against the former Minerva lawyer.
1t was alleged that Kibler had aided
Mrs. Sylvester Morehead, of Minerva,
to secure a divorce from her husband.
The attorney, after being retained by
Mrs Morehead, is is alleged, went to
the husband and promised him that the
divorce would be procured by Mrs.
Morehead without alimony. When
the case was heard it, is said Kibler
had incorporated the alimony feature
which he is alleged to have promised not
to do for a consideration, so that the
court decreed that the divorced wife
should receive $500 and $20 per month
alimony.
In substantiation Of these charges
SYLVESTER MOREHEAD
Took the stand Monday afternoon and
told the story substantially as related
saying that he paid Kibler $50 for the
privilege of being divorced without
being compelled to pay alimony. On
cross examination by Judge Baldwin,
for the defendant, Mr.. Morehead admit
ted that he had gone to Attorney Finn
pie to procure a divorce and had not
objected to his wife taking the action
she did take.
"Is it not a fact" said Judge Bald
win, that you gave your wife money
with which to get divorce?"
IT hope God may strike me dead If
that's true" dramatically responded the
witness.
God will attend to you in due time, -
said Judge Baldwin and three judges on
the bench raped for order as the crowd
laughed aloud. Mr.. Morehead stood the
cross questioning with i'll ease. He
admitted not having told his lawyer of
the alleged actions of Kibler and all
in all the defendant did not get much
the worst of it. There were no other
witnesses on the divorce part Of the
specifications.
H. P. TAYLOR.
Mr. H. P. Taylor was the next witness
called. His testimony was in reference
to the alleged attempt Of bribery of
witnesses which defendant was charged
with in a certain law suit between
Minerva and West Virginia parties. The
case is somewhat complicated.
Kibler stands charged, in the specifi-
cations, with having attempted to bribe
G. It. Whitacre and DR.. L. E. Casey to
testify in behalf of Milton Brast, who
it is alleged was endeavoring to secure
title to 80 acres Of land in West Vir-
ginia that had been owned by Mr.. Tay-
lor and which had been sold for taxes
Brast had bought the taX-title and, it is
said, had made several journeys to
Minerva to secure quit claim deed
finally succeeding by paying Mr.. Taylor
the sum of $50. 1t seems that prior to
the signing of this quit claim, Taylor
had sold SO acres of the West Virginia
land, of which the 80 acres mentioned
formed a part, to Mrs. Cordelia E.
Perdue. F. w. Faas acted as Mrs
Perdue's agent and it is said he sent the
deed to a New Martinsville attorney
to have it recorded. He also sent each
year, it is claimed, money with which
to pay the taxes. 1t seems the New
Martinsville barrister failed to have
the deed recorded and also failed to pay
the taxes. So the property was sold
in the name of H. p. Taylor to Brast
1t is contended that Brast when nego-
tiating for the quit claim had a CONVEX
sation with Taylor, who in the presence
of Stanton Perdue told Brast that he
had sold and decided the West Virginia
property away, when the fact is he did
not own it. In the meantime the land
in dispute became rich oil producing
territory and was consequently greatly
enhanced in value. A big fight was
made to recover it by Mrs. Perdue
Mr.. Faas, acting as her agent on the
proposition that he was to receive a
certain percentage took up the legal
fight and finally secured the deed and
a judgement for $1,000 against Brast
as the owners share in the output Of oil
1t was in the heat of this contest II
is said, that Kibler was employed by
Brast and the young attorney is accused
of attempting to bribe the witnesses tc
go upon the stand and testify in favor
of the West Virginia man. Mr.. Taylor
on the witness stand testified substan-
TALLY to the facts related giving minute
details of meetings and conversations
had at different times and places which
were in a measure inconsequential tc
the proceedings.
Stanton Perdue followed Mr.. Taylor
and told of the meeting of Taylor and
Brast; related the conversations be-
tween the men carried on in his presence
and testified that Taylor received the
$50 for signing the quit claim deed. AL
this testimony was preliminary and leo
up to the testimony Of
G. T. WHITACTE.
Mr.. Whitacre is one of the men whom
1t is alleged Attorney Kibler attempted
to bribe. He testified that he had known
Kibler for the past three years and had
been on friendly terms with him. He
said on May 9. 1899, Kibler had met hin
and told him to come up to his Office
after supper. II went to Kiblers Office