The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-08-27

Loves estate l should certainly have
carried out the compromise which | had
dssented to for thereby Mrs. .art would
De greatly benefited. In the first Mace
she' in common with her brother. would
nave the right to enjoy the premises she
now occupies and which. as / said rnieht
De made to bring in income of prob
ABLY 5000 to Mr.. Love and she vould
nave the certainty of getting one-haIf Of
the estate remaining on Mr. Loves death
AS II Is now she is merely a tenant at
+; VIII and subject to be turned out or
the house, which her father once do
sired her TO occupy, at any time As il
now stands, upon Mr.. Loves death she
may get nothing at all, she not being
MS heir. and it being possible that he
might make will giving all his propertv
= to others. During the progress of tho
case 1t came out that Mr.. Love had made
VIII by which a large portion of his
estate mad been given to Mrs Roe 7
submit 1t may be fairly assumed that
the influence which could induce Mr.
Love TO make this will, giving a large
part of his property TO a stranger who
could nave no claims upon him. the wife
Oh another man, passing by his own
children, would induce him, if he had an
opportunity, to ignore them altogether
IN the disposition of his property But
whether Mr.. Love ought to be restrained
from carrying out his unnatural desires
IN THIS respect or not, Mr.. Fitch can GER
talnty not truthfully charge me with be-
ing party in any attempt TO rob him
But there is another and irreconcila BILE
dlHerence between Mr.. Fitch and myself
MI fltch In his supplemental petition
states that l have mot acted in the in
terest of petitioner (Afr Love- but in the
interests and as counsel of Mrs Annie Il
Hart, and your petitioner further AYERS
that prior to the judgment of February
l4th, 1885, adjudicating him to be a spend
thflft your petitioner conveyed to Mrs
Annie X. Hart who is ,ae iIIeeitimate
daughter of petitioner the fee of a yaIu-
able mousse and lot on King street in Ho-
nolulu, the petitioner retaining only a
life interest in said property.
THAT petitioner AYERS that he is i11stlx-
grateful to this family (Mrs. Roe's) for
their kind care of him and that if your
petitioner should at any time utter the
removal of the spendthrift judgment of
feoruary ii, 1895, desire to express his
appreciation of the continued kindness
and care of the family in question bv
giving to them some small portion of
the estate which your petitioner acquir-
ed through his own industry and thrift
1t will be his right and privilege to do
so, for your petitioner has neither wife
nor child nor kindred of any kind nearer
than nephew; that he has. no legal
obligation toward the said Annie K
hart and in view of her constant alb
sorption of about one-fourth of the in
come of your petitioner and her insist
ence in maintaining the judgment Of Feb
ruary IA, 1895, fraudulently obtained as
aforesaid and at a cost to your petitioner
OF about one-fifth of his income for fees
and commission Of j. A Magoon. ESQ.
net
x. Hart has no moral claims upon him."
1t is not a wonder that Mr.. Fitch's
arm did not become paralyzed before
he could have finished writing such an
outrageous statement. He first brands
the daughter as illegitimate and then
states that she has no moral claims I'D
on her father. Shame on you Thomas
Fitch! Where is the power of resistance
of Mr.. Love that he could be induced to
sign such petition? Could it be believ-
ed that man could be found so low as
TO make father say of his own daugh-
ter that she was illegitimate and had no
moral claims upon him? The testimony
SHOWS that Mr.. Love took the mother
OF mis- daughter IN all respects as his
wife many years ago. That she lived
with him, performed all the duties of a
wife, bore him children, submitted TO his
drunken debauches and revolving conduct
III OEei d QUARTER OIL a century, and now
that she is dead when the tremendous
wrong which he did her can never be
repaired, when the outrageous wrong
which he committed upon his child en-
on whom he bestowed all the affection
that such father could bestow and in
every respect recognized them as his own
lawful children; when the right to par
italy rectify it all has passed beyond
recall, who is this man. Thomas Fitch.
who will fiaunt the illegitimacy of these
children in their faces over their fathers
signature, to intensity the disgrace, to
make the pain more hard to bear, and
put 1t on record as a matter of history
to go down to their children and their
children's children.
have occupied an unenviable position
in apparently standing between Mr.. Love
and his desires, but 1 believe l was ap-
pointed for just this purpose, that is. to
protect Mr.. Love against himself and
the evil influences to which he Is sub
jected and should I fail so to do l would
certainly be unworthy of the confidence
reposed in me by the Court. 1 think it
Is apparent by what I have said that
/ have never benefited Mrs. Hart at the
expense of Mr.. Love, but on the other
hand l have had the disagreeable duty
of resisting both of their wishes when
opposed to what I considered his best
interests But how about Mr.. Fitch Is
MS the pure motive and lofty purpose of
man trying to remedy the outrage to
which, as he would make it appear. Mr.
Love has been subjected, or do his ac-
tons show that he is sailing under false
colors for the purpose of ge.,-ng a large
part of this old mans estate for himself
and Mrs. Roe? 1 leave to the candid
Judgment of others to decide who L. the
thief, who the robber, who the villain.
VINO the betrayer of trusts, Thomas
Fitch, or