The San Francisco call., 1901-10-24

stand as the star witness of the day.
Even his closest friends wouldn't know
Metson is known as a mild-mannered
man. He told a tale yesterday of prepa-
rations at Nome for gun-fghting on a
magnificent scale. He was right there,
were forced to play men from Missouri or
so far back out of the range of guns and
legal processes before he quit an inch of
his ground.
Although there were five witnesses on
the stand during the day, Metson was
plot spoken of by Hume in his testimony
was Matched. He was there during the
entire trouble, and in fact mixed right III
the midst of it as one with an active in
terest 1t was Metson who started the
ball rolling and the contempt cases are
the last development What he told of
the judicial methods of Judge Noyes was
afternoon Metson ate fire with Judge Nc
Laughlin. Both realized that liberal
mixture of reason with their valor would
eXtinguish the argumentative conf1agra-
ton, and the only real case of bad tenn
per in two days was smoothed over with
mutual compliments.
Judge Mcguire, who represents Ton
Geary, took hand at cross-questioning
Metson on the part that Geary played )
the counselor. of Mckenzie. The most
lated to two orders issued by Judge Noyes
with pencil marks calling attention that
they were not to be filed and the action
OF Judge Noyes IN regard to the appoint
ment of the receivers.
Mckenzie Rushed Things.
At the opening of the morning session
chair for few questions from Amicus
Curiae PillSbury and a short cross-eXam- :
ination by Attorney Mclaughlin. The
Colonel May episode and the conversation
bribe offer Of $4,000 if the Judge " would I'D
displace the latter was threshed over
without the production of new facts.
Then w. I. Hume, the first witness
called, appeared to correct errors in his
testimony, which he characterized as un-
Intentional. When 1t came to the cross
examination Francis j. Heney for the
first time took a hand at the wheel.
Miss James, who was the stenographer
Hume when the papers for Mckenzie $
receivership were made out. was the third
witness of the day. But a few questions
What If anything, did you notice about Nc
Kenzie while these papers were being pre-
pared?"
You remember the circumstance when Nc
Kenzie was appointedT
WAS he in the office on that day?''
Yes in the morning He examined the pa
Samuel Knights Story.
There was no cross-examination and
"A
Samuel Knight being next called to the
stand.
Knight told how he was engaged in law
practice at Nome during the memorable
period, that he net Judge Noyes Cor the
first time about July a. 1900, and that
they had an interview of some import
ance on that day. He said:
'I called on Judge Noyes to have Mckenzie
removed from the receivership and was ready
with affdavits. / wanted nearing but he
said it necessary for him to go to st.
Michael. l asked for the order. but he still re-
fused. and then 1 told him that I would notify
Hubbard. Beeman & Hume that would move
the court at O. clock to set aside the order ap-
pointing receivers. At that time 1 appeared In
three cases involving claims Anvil Creek
Hume represented the other side. The matter
was argued 1 had some difficulty in being
heard, but insisted. No decision was rendered
on the following Monday, as Judge Noyes left
for st. Michael. On his return we were ad-
vised that the motions were to be reargued. On
August Duboce and Hume made arguments
in behalf of the court. The motions were de-
cided adversely on August 10.
After that I made application to increase
the bonds in the cases in which was interested
as an attorney 1 also made an application tc
Judge Noyes for order allowing an appeal
but this denied.
1.-THE motion for increase of bonds was
taken up In September, but no order made be.
I fore the writs of supersedeas arrived.