The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-09-19
"INvERAcITY OF JUDGE HUM
PHREYs.n

The San Francisco Chronicle of the
5th, under the above head, has this
scathing denunciation Of Judge Hum
phreys:
Judge Abram 8. Humphreys of the Ter
ritorial Circuit Court of Hawaii has sub
mitted his answer in person at Washing
ton to the charges on which the Bar
Association of the Hawaiian Islands
bases its petition for his removal from
the bench. This answer contains count.
er charges of official corruption and Of
private immoralities which may or may
not be true. Whether true or false, they
do not seem to be germane to the ac-
cusatiens which the Bar Association has
lodged against him as proof of his un-
fitness as a member of the Territorial
judiciary. The association charges him
with displaying prejudice and being un-
duly severe on the bench, and, through
the ownership and control of partisan
newspaper. attempting to control the
politics of the Territory. To the latter
charge the Judge fatty denies in his an
swer that since he has been on the bench
he has had any part in the management
of the paper, in which he admits the
ownership of a substantial part Of the
stock. This latter representation stamps
Judge Humphreys as untruthful what
ever else he may and may not be- On
the oath of June the .sChronicler printed
an interview with Judge Humphreys In
which he advocated the annexation of
Hawaii territory to California as means
of correcting all Its political troubles
The article was written for the "Chroni-
cle' by C. E. Edwards, who was CO.
passenger with Judge Humphreys from
Honolulu, where he had been employed
as manager of the Judges newspaper.
whose policy the Judge directed up to
the time of his departure from the ISL
ands. This interview was furthermore
written at the suggestion of the Judge,
and it was revised by him before 1t was
published. But in the Honolulu Republt-
can of July 7th-his own paper-the IN
terview was repudiated by the Judge In
the following language: "The Chronicle
of the oath has an article which think
must have been sent from Honolulu. It
was a fake, pure and simple" Again, In
q Chronicle" interview published June
23d-the day of his arrival in San Fran
cisco-Judge Humphreys stated that he
would go to Washington to try to back
fire the movement against him in Homo
lulu, while next morning. in an inter-
view published In local contemporary,
he declared positively that he had no
business in Washington and was not go
ing there. OF course, he gave the lie to
the latter assertion himself by shortly
afterwards quietly crossing the continent
to the national capital, where he still is.
The Chronicle" Is thus justified In as
serting that he is incontestabiy an un-
truthful man, and with that fact In evi-
dence 1t win be astonishing If the gov
ernment should decide to accept his evt-
dence as conclusive In any case In which
he is personally concerned
In the editorial statement dealing with
the inveracity of Judge Humphreys, pub
lished yesterday. a minor error appear
ed which we hasten to correct. Judge
Humphreys was credited with the re-
sponsibility for the statement printed IN
the Chronicle of June 23d. as 1t was
inadvertently represented to be an inter-
view. When that statement was written
the Judge had not reached the city, and
therefore could not have been interview
ed. But the representation contained in
it that he was going to Washington to
backfire the charges against him was
positively denied by him in an interview
published In local contemporary the
following morning, in which he declared
that he had no business which called
him there. His inveracity In this case
was shown by his subsequent departure
to Washington for the very purpose orig
inally described In the chronicles"
statement of June 23d. and which he had
so emphatically denied.