The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-11-07

meas OF TIE C8AGa4G&O3e t4&fE1fA@
approve this report with this excep
GEO. A. DAVIS.
Cecil Brown moved that the report
be rriuted for distribution; seconded
By ". r Castle XcClanahan thought
the first thing 10 do vss TO act upon
the report and moTed that il be adopt
ed: A @. NJ. Robertson seconded the
latter motion
C. c. Biting here took the f0or
and said that IN the run Of ordinary
policy be supposed he should oppose
Judge Humphreys and favor the re-
port He had been jailed for ten days
by Judge Humphreys. At the same
time. he regarded the present report
as unfair and undignffed- He knew
that his remarks were in conflict with
the pFejudices OF a majority OF the
members present. The speaker beleiy-
ed. however, that under the circum-
stances he was perfectly justified In
taking issue with his professional
friends. Mr. Biting challenged the
bar to point out a single instance in
which Judge Humphreys had been un-
Just. The speaker had not switched
from any former position Neither
had be been approached" AS mat
ter OF right and justice he was opposed
to the resolutions.
L. A. Thurston here took the floor
and stated that prior TO the meeting
Of the Bar Association in May, Mr. Bit
| ting had been shown the manifesto
| which has since become notorious, and
had signed H.
Mr. Biting said he signed the pa
per presented to him by Mr.. Thurston
| and A. G. NJ Robertson purely for the
purpose Of bringing the matter up In
q business like way. He did not con-
slider himself bound as TO HIS future
action In the case and was so assured
by Mr.. Thurston himself
W. l. Stanley said that Mr. Biting
was laborfng under amisapprehension
Of the situation. The paper submitted
was purely a report on certain duties
entrusted to it by the association. 1t
was practically a repetition of the
brief previously fled There was no
reflection as to the astuteness, capa-
bilities or justice of Judge Hum
ohreys.
J. NJ Vivas here took the floor and
made vigorous attack upon the work
Of the committee and the evident dis
position OF the majority of the gather
ing to diseredit the work of Judge
Humphreys. He declared that he had,
all the way through. failed TO discover
anything Objectionable in the course
or acts of the first Judge The speak
er had had it rubbed into him" at
different times by Judge Humphreys,
rs he thought; but on calm reflection
had invariably reached the conclusion
hat the court was right and he wrong
He wanted to go on record as opposing
he adoption of the report. He was
sorry TO see the matter raked up again.
was case of revivifying corpse
that had best remain dead. He strong
y suspected that the Bar Association
was being made tools of by politicians.
At best the future would tell. II
Judge Humphreys was right the fact
would come out: IL the Bar Associa-
ton was right it would soon enough
appear. The speaker asked that the
question should be STAYED of for a
time
Cecil Brown replied that there was
no politics in the committees report
Mr.. Matthewman spoke strongly in
favor of the report He said that had
he been here at the time of the meet
ng of the Bar Association the num-
Der voting for the round-robin sent to
Washington would have been thirty
tight in place of thirty-seven-
Lorrin Andrews. for the sommittee.
stated that the report was merely
report. II was the conclusion of In
structions given the committee by the
Bar Association.
)nly one question involved He
thought that while honoring the court
he association should not lose its self
respect
Mr. vivas objected to the comments
Of Mr.. De Bolt In endorsing Judge
Humphreys he did not feel that he was
losing any self-respect. In fact he
thought that endorsement was priv
ilege and an honor.
p. L. Weaver maintained that the
proceeding was logical and proper The
committee was instructed TO report
and had done so.
]. A Magoon suggested that the re-
port should be considered impartially
Mr. Humphreys, as man. should not
De considered in the case at all. It
should be a straight consideration of
merits and dement's. The speaker
'eviewed the history OF the case and
affirmed that he could not see that the
report was justified by the facts. The
reversal Of the protest OF the Bar AS
ISOLATION by Attorney General Knox
was something unprecedented in the
history of the United States. It was
4 reproof that should cause ali mem
bers to reflect and hesitate. Even the
committee was not unanimous George
in its present form. Besides the report
u its present form Besides the repor
xas decidedly irregular in that it was
a new trial OF settled case. Taken
al in all. the speaker could not con-
scientiously endorse any part OF it.
Mr.. Achi believed that the original
decision of the Bar Association was
correct. even though the decision of
Attorney General Knox was against
II. He did not believe Mr.. Knox's de-
cision was sound. and moved the pre-
rious question
ID. II. Case asked to be excused from
voting on the question for the reason
that he had recently had misunder-
standing with Judge Humphreys and