The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-01-03
De Bolt Says the
Money Belongs
to Him.
OLD MAN WOULD
APPOINT AGENT
Has a Man in Mind But Denies
the lnsinuatien That His
Name Is Magoon.


John K. Sumner. The suit against him
is rapidly drawing to a close, and there
was a time yesterday when it appeared
as if Judge De Bolt would end it all
and order the $4S,O25 paid over to him
Sumner revoked the trust deed the first
followed by a motion to strike from the
records all defendants but himself.
While Judge De Bolt overruled the
motion, he inrlmated strongly that the
deed was no longer in existence, and
said plainly that the old man was en-
titled to his money.
Sumner is anxious to get his money
and leave for Tahiti by the earliest
boat. He told Judge De Bolt on the
stand that he needed some one to man
age his property but he wanted to
name the man himself.
There were several sensations during
the progress of the trial. The attor-
neys spent considerable time in abus-
ing each other, Davis accusing the
Ellises Of coming into court with Gun
clean hands and therefore not being
entitled to appear in the case. Davis
also said that he had a contract with
Sumner for his fee in the present case,
49, =. 20
have the court fix it. Judge De Bolt
intimated that the attorneys had feast
ed all he would permit off the old mans
estate, but no order was made.
There was also thrown out an init
nation by Humphreys that the deed Of
Dillingham; to the reef property was
questionable, because the Bishop had
no right to sell the property under the
deed. This suggestion was vigorously
combated by Davis. who said that the
deed had been signed by all parties at
interest.
Another sensation was the rumor that
Sumner was to appoint Magoon as his
new trustee, but the old man vigorous
ly denied this.
Immediately upon the opening of
court, Davis, following out the sugges-
ton in yesterdays Advertiser, wrote a
revocation of the trust deed, and hand
ed it to Sumner for his signature. Judge
De Bolt allowed the signing of the re-
vocation, without in any way passing
stand for moment to do this. Then it
was stated that the revocation would
have to be attested by a notary public,
and E. S. Cunha was asked to do this
Bolt mentioned that the fee for such
service was one dollar. Sumner had
already pulled out a handful of gold, |
and gave Cunha a half eagle with a |
glance around the room as an indica- |
ton to others how cheaply the service |
had been reformed. One of the attor-
neys suggested to the court that the |
usual fee in the case Of Sumner was
1000 for a service OF that kind. but
Judge De Bolt replied that the legal |
fee was amply sufficient. Cunha re-
turned the change after the signature |
had been attested.
Mr.. Davis then moved to strike out
the answers of John S. Ellis, w. S.
Ellis, Victoria Buffandeau, and Maria |
S. Davis on the ground that they were
not properly parties to the suit. He
argued that they We're not interested
in the deed. and that the will upon
which their claims were based had not
been shown. Magoon who stated that
he appeared for both Mrs. Davis and
Sumner said he would consent to the
striking out of the name of Mrs. Davis, |
as she had never made any claim upon
the old mans estate. He suggested |
however that it was not proper prac-
tice to strike out the names of party |
after the trial of the case
had been started. That is the only
point troubling the court" replied
Judge De Bolt.
Humphreys objected to the striking |
cut of the names of the Eliises and the |
court sustained the objection, saying |
that he would not do this until there |
appeared evidence to prove that they I
had no claim or interest in the case.
There was a brief cross-examination |
Of Sumner, by Magoon after which |
Humphreys took the old man in hand. |
Sumner admitted to him that he had |
received $4,000 from the sale of the |
reef lands and that he had given $40 |