The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-06-24
SAYS Story
IS A LIE
Judge Estee Talks OF
the Examiner
Fake.

The following Associated Press dis
patch which came In the Advertisers
special service yesterday called forth
an emphatic denial from Judge Estee:
NEW YORK. June 1s.-Mrs. Sarah
Eetee. former wife OF Morris NJ Estse.
twice candidate for Governor OF Cali
forula and now Federal Judge In Homo
lulu, has been found dead In her board
ing house in Brooklyn. where she has
made her home during the past ten
years. Mrs. Estee was before her mar
Rage TO Judge Estee. Miss Sarah Phil
lips. a leading society girl or Memphis
Tenn
The Examiner added a few touches OF
It's own TO this brief dispatch. which the
Judge characterized as follows:
ct have seen the article referred to
In the Examiner OF the 18th inst. IL Is
wholly untrue and absurd on Its face.
I lived In California since L was Is
years old, in fact until I came TO the
Islands. I was married there in 1853 to
my present wife. who was the daughter
OF Judge Divine OF San jose, and who
Is now with me in the islands. There
are people living in California who were
present at my wedding. Ny daughter
Mrs. Charles J. Deering. the only child
living. Is at present in San Francisco.
81 think this must be either a prac-
teal joke. and II so IL is in very poor
taste or some mistake. The name is
an unusual one, and I know OF no other
Judge Estee.
There are plenty OF people in the ISL
ands who know that the entire thing Is
false. Judge A. l.. Rhodes OF Califor-
MIA who Is known here. was with iiie
at my wedding in 1853. when married
my present wife. George Mckenzie OF
Hilo was sheriff OF my county at the
time. and there are many others who
can corroborate my statement IL such
a thing Is necessary. My wife and /
have been married nearly 90 years and
she Is living with me today. while my
daughter who returned to San Fran
cisco n short time ago. Is 30. And yet
the Examiners article claims that
Was divorced from n woman who Is now
dead. only 10 years ago."
He added to this written statement In
vigorous language.
ut is n deliberate and malicious lie.''
he said. and there seems TO have been
n preconceived plan as far as regards
its publication. though do not accuse
the Examiner OF doing this IL was
published on the morning OF June 18th.
the day the steamer sailed. and there
was no chance for n denial i have no
doubt that the story was sent TO wash
ington on the same day IL was publish
Ell In san Francisco. Senator Perkins.
who 10 there. knows. however. that IL
In not true. and i think Senator Bard
also knows the facts In regard TO my
marriage. I never was In Memphis.
Tenn. where the article says the wom-
an In from. and I cannot account for
the attack by the Examiner. The state
ment In that paper that the charges
made by n divorced wife were used
against me In the gubernntorial cam
paisn u unquaiifediy false. and chai-
irugc the Examiner TO find n single
statement TO that effect In its records.
can't understand the object OF the
publication at this time. Is anyone
trysrG to get my position here7 Well.
can't answer that just now. Shall (
take action because OF the publication
have not considered that matter at
ALI"
Judge Estee had many callers ycster-
day who expressed themselves very
strongly over the publication OF a story
which In San Francisco must have been
known 20 be false on it's face. The
Judge has many friends In Honolulu.
who were acquainted with him prior TO
the alleged divorce OF the New York
woman. and who know that there Is not
one atom OF truth IN the published re-
port.