The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-12-27
SUMNER
CASE IS
ON TRIAL.
CONTINUED from Page ~

Objections We're made TO their being
fled but the court allowed them Mr..
Thompson contended that diligence
had been shown in securing the testi-
rlony of the Ellises and in any event
it i'll became opposing counsel to make
such an accusation when they had
been seeking to delay the trial. by ir-
relevant pleadings. He said further
that the main issue had not been
touched upon, the affidavit regarding
Bishop Gulstan. His evidence, it was
argued, was needed, and the trial of
the case would have to be postponed
until he could appear.
Mr. Magoon replied that deposition
might be taken at the Bishops home,
and that it was not likely that he
would ever be able to appear in court
in any event. He suggested that the
case proceed as far as possible and
if d continuance was then shown to be
inevitable he would make no objection.
Judge De Bolt stated that he recog- :
nized that the condition of the Bishop
was the gravest question and this
must first be settled. my view per-
sonally,' said the court lis to wait
unit! the Bishop is able to testify. and
l cannot see how we can proceed
otherwise, and 1 think the best thing
would be to postpone the hearing. Why
counsel for Mr.. Sumner. in view of
the Bishops inability to testify, still
insist on proceeding with the case 1 do
not understand Still Mr. Sumner is
entitled 70 hearing The motion for
a continuance is overruled; too much
| time has been wasted already, these
| side issues We're uncalled for and I'M
dignified and only delayed the trial.
Is the plaintiff ready to proceeds"
The plaintiffs attorney stated that
he was ready to proceed if the court
ordered and would present the case as
best he could. The trial was COM
menced then by the reading of the
complaint, in which the Bishop asked
leave to resign. Certain parts relating
1
| tc the fact that there had been trust
deed Were admitted as evidence. over
the objection of the Ellis interests. 1T
appearing that the answer had admit
| ted this to be fact, The trust deed
was also admitted in evidence, also
i a paragraph setting out the Bishops
desire to resign. Over all of this there
was objection, it being contended that
| the Bishop could not resign without
appearing in court and testifying that
he wished to do SO. !. MR. Thompson
contended also that the complaint in
| the case could not be considered as sv-
| idence.
i Mr.. Magoon argued that the mere
resignation Of a trustee was sufficient
| to make the resignation take effect,
and that the Bishop having signified
such intention he was now free. Ne
evidence was introduced by the plain
| tiff excepting that contained In the adj
mitted allegations OF the complaint,
but witnesses will probably be called
this morning. The plaintiff is in
| peculiar position. The Bishop has NO
concern in any OF the questions in
volved in the case>> and is willing to
! quit, without reference to the DISPOSE
ton to DO made of the estate. The
defendants are engaged In war
anoEg themselves as to what DISPOSE
! ton should be made of the $4,000 now
! in the hands of the court. Davis,
who appeared for Sumner, Humphreys,
| who represents the Ellises and Ma
COON, who appears for the Davises, are
/ should be made of the money. Hum
phreys contends that the trust still
exists and the $4,000 is subject to the
provisions in the will making the Ell.
lis children the beneficiaries. Magoon
claims that the trust deed was can
celled by Sumner and himself the day
they visited the Bishop. Davis APP
pearing for Sumner, contends that the
trust deed has nothing to do with the
s4S 900, it having been released from
any provisions Of the trust through
an agreement between Sumner, Mrs.
Davis ard the Ellis children, by which
the old man was to receive the whole
sum in consideration of the payment
of $4,000 to each OF them. Curiously
enough the parties most at interest in
the suit, have now apparently the
least concern in its outcome. The
plaintiff, Bishop Gulstan, lies on his
death bed, no longer concerned with
earthly affairs. John K. Sumner, the
man whose money is at stake. appears
in court daily during the various hear
ings. but he simply follows the pro-
caedings with an amused smile. He
has about given up hope of getting out
of the hands of the lawyers and is en-
joying himself as best he can, in
watching them fight over his money.
So far. it is admitted, the case of the
plaintiff has not been made out and un-