The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1903-07-03
SECRETS
LAID BARE
More Light Cast
Upon Sumner
Cases.
(From Wednesdays Daily.)

l
| On the resumption of the disbar-
ment proceedings against Humphreys
and Thompson. before the Supreme
Court yesterday morning. Mr.. Thomp-
! son took up the ross-examination OF
Mr.. Magoon where Mr.. Humphreys had
rested the previous afternoon. This
was taken as regular then, but Attor-
ney General Andrews appealed to prac-
! tice late in the day against too much
of counsel in that line.
1t was when Humphreys and Thomp-
! son had seemingly exhausted their in
quisitorial acumen and memoranda up
on Mr.. Highton, and the court had TAX
en- a hand itself in bringing out points,
that John w. Cathcart suddenly inter-
| jected an interrogatory to the witness.
TOO MANY INQUIsIToRS.
Mr.. Andrews asked for whom the
questloner appeared and when Mr..
Thompson said he had asked to have
Mr.. Cathcart entered of counsel for
the respondents, the Attorney General
objected to associate counsel's contin-
uing the cross-examination. He said
the usual practice was for but one at
torney on d side to cross-examine one
witness.
Mr.. Thompson apparently submitted
to the objection by repeating Mr.. Cath
carts question for him, but associate
counsel came up again with the ques-
ton:
"Who is the Mr. Cathcart to whom
you referred in your evidence?"
Mr. Andrews laughingly said It would
be admitted by the prosecution that 1t
was not John w. Cathcart, Esq, the
former Deputy Attorney General.
MAGooN'S EVIDENCE
Mr. Magoon was questioned minute
ly on 1.-THE conference in his office over
the settlement The first he knew of
any compromise was when Thompson
came to his Office with Sumner, Wally
Davis, Geo. A. Davis and others.
Thompson would not accept less than
$50, 900 for the Ellises, and wally Davis
would not consent to more than $4,000.
Thompson objected to Wally Daviss
presence, as it was conference of at
torneys. wally Davis informed wit
ness the 100000 was a bluff and that
the Ellis side would accept $4,000.
Witness had no authority to compro-
mise at that time, but afterward I'M
derstood that Sumner was willing to
give $4,000. He remembered the in
sanity suit when G.. A. Davis sent for
him and he telephoned Humphreys to
ask If it would embarrass him If he
twitness) took the other side; didn't
know then which case 1t was; made no
attack then against Humpbxeys. r., !,
Humphreys INDUCED in 49,,
gainst him which the judge
STOP .,ru.
THE TRADE sTs nade
ha - ~ WOnJsy
u aes91mony ae on,t't the i, cks
6 phreys, Later ah,a.t the striss ain M,
names on afiidavits t sust, by Hum.
ty. NtestI 'ained A.
RELUCTANCE INff Summary as to
Witness had singleL SAM
Ellis on the affidavit because IL wa.
In his mind; did appear with G.. A.
Davis to put Sumner under guardian
ship and later appeared to defend him
In another suit; did not object to
Thompson appearing in the suit for a
new trustee, Ropert vs.. Sumner, as he
didn't think he had been attorney for
Sumner; when he filed affidavits
against Humphreys and moved to have
his name stricken as counsel from the
records, he was ready for trial and
wanted to have night sessions but
the court was not willing; Judge De
Bolt asked him to withdraw the mo-
ton, not with the alternative of going
to immediate trial, but because 1t would
delay the case; did say he would not
have charged Sumner $4,000 for the
compromise: received $250O fee In Ma
ria S. Davis case, and Geo. A. Davis
wa to frnf he It,pN III, 80
the proposal of Humphreys. as 1t was
bluff, holdup, an outrage; saw moth
ing criminal In 1t; did not know about
nothing being improper unless 1t was
criminal; there was a man with whom
he was on most intimate terms, did
not want to think his proposition was
blackmail; from standpoint of witness
1t was highly improper.
Mr.. Magoon was questioned on his
direct testimony as to the blanket trust
deed of Sumner to Wally Davis. but
nothing inconsistent Herewith was
ELECTED. When this deed was exc
cuted. he released Summers power Of
attorney to himself. He did not re-
cord the trust deed, not deeming 1t
necessary.
HUMPHREYS WAGERS GOLD.
AttoTHey a. l4iBHtloot, WHO mas OI-
flee room In Magoons and works for
him, testified to a conversation with
Humphreys in the Law Library one
night. Humphreys drew from his
pocket "a large number of gold pieces"
and offered to wager them against a
smaller amount that he would win the
case against Sumner; Humphreys was
very serious about 1t. and said he
would appeal from the Hawaiian SUI
preme Court. IL it decided adversely,
to the Federal Supreme Court on the
ground that Chief Justice Frear and
Justice Perry We're disqualified.
OF HUMPHREYS.
Miss Clark. formerly stenographer
for Humphreys. Thompson & Watson.
Identified various documents as hav-
ing been typewriter by her; the an
swer in the guardianship suit was not
dictated but given her In the hand
of Humphreys; was told by
-rTTrr-r u II
<fV-