The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-06-28

authorship of the letter to Bishop &
Co. At the time it was written he
says he did not know the moneys were
under control of Sumner, and ne denies
that he had ever taken any part in the
distribution of the larger part of the
funds. He denies that he ever acted as
attorney for Sumner in contending that
he was the owner of the money and
that he knew all the claims of the
EIlises had been compromised.
CHARGES AGAINST OTHERS.
Humphreys denies the charge that
he made a proposal to Magoon for ex-
torting more money from Sumner, on
the contrary averring that all PROPOSE
tions for compromise, except as herein
after stated, came from Magoon and
Geo. A. Davis. He admits having in
conversation with MagOon said he
would prevent, by every and all legal
proceedings he could possibly invoke,
the withdrawal by Sumner of the trust
| funds.
Respondent admits the information
as to appearances of attorneys in the
| suit for a new trustee, and that he pre-
pared the answer for the EIiises with
out his name appearing therein, but
denies that he did not appear in such
/ answer because he knew he had no
right to appear against his client
! Sumner" He denies that the new
! trusteeship suit was for the purpose
\ of harassing Sumner. On the con-
trary he AYERS it was prosecuted by
himself and Thompson in good faith
Finally, when he contended before
the Supreme Court that the trust was
! irrevocable. he did not do so with any
| knowledge that in the answer filed for
and on behalf of said Sumner in said
/ guardianship proceedings it had been
\ stated that said Sumner could dispose
/ of bis property as he saw fit" He then
enters a general denial to leach and
every allegation, charge, statement, in
/ ference and conclusion in said infor-
nation contained, which may impute to
/ him fraud, malpractice, deceit. profess
sional improprieties. infidelity To his
/ clients and gross misconduct or any
/ other conduct tending TO detract from
his professional or personal dignity and
honor and his usefulness as a member
of the bar and as a citizen
There is appended TO the formal an
swer a dozen pages of history of Mr..
! Humphreys's acquaintance with Sum-
ner and his affairs. In this section
of the document the respondent ex-
plains why he did not sign that certain
answer of the Eliises, yet afterward
appeared in court as their attorney.
I He had concluded his brother-in-law
! Magoon's conduct in obtaining Sum-
ners money from the Bishop, permit
ting Sumner to destroy his will and
depositing the money with Bishop &
Co was highly reprehensibIe and dis
creditable and that it would be neces-
sary to prove the same" and after the
answer in question was prepared by
/ respondent il was agreed by the mem
J bers of his firm that in view of the
relations between his and Magoon's
/ families, the answer should be sub
| scribed by Thompson and Watson.
Subsequently he concluded that "a con-
sideration of delicacy'' should yield TO
] the obligation he owed his clients
whose retainer he had accepted. Hence
he appeared for the Ellises in court.
Mr.. Humphreys declares that he has
not had any professional relations with
Sumner. as attorney and client, since
April IS. 1898. Sumner took dislike 10
| him once when, as counsel for W. s.
Ellis. he prevented the execution of
deed giving r. w. Cathcart $4,000 in
trust without any bond. to pay the in
come to the Ellises and SIS a month
to Cathcart for handling the money.
Highton. whom he knew from Califor-
MIA legal literature, was a man of fair
professional ability" brought him
letter Of introduction from a very near
relative of respondents, and in the deal
with the railway company induced the
respondent to promise him professional
assistance. but he turned the whole
matter over to Thompson, who would
render him such assistance as he could.
il being distinctly understood that the
firm did not appear for nor represent
said Sumner.
Respondent submits to the candid
judgment of others his professional
ability. but he begs leave to assert that
he has never broken faith with any
client or at any time abandoned high
conception Of personal and professional
honor he says at the end OF the MS
tOricaI sketch. concluding:
And now having fully answered said
information, respondent prays the
judgment Of this honorable court eX-
onerating him from the charges therein
contained.