Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1903-01-13
JUDGE DE BOLT
FEELS BOUND
TO ALLOW APPEAL

ordinary one for costs, yesterday after
noon. This was after George A. Davis
attorney for John X. Sumner had oc.
that the Ellises had no appeal and, II
the court should find otherwise. that
they must file a supsedeas bond in an
amount adequate to protect Sumner
adequately against the greatest possible
damage he might sustain from the de.
privation of the money to which the
court decreed he was entitled.
Repeatedly, in the proceedings, thu
court announced its desire that Sum
ner should receive his money forthwith
is his attorney could show that sucp
might be legally effected.
A PRELUDE to the signing OF the de.
cree was an imprisoned appeal by MIR
Davis TO Judge De Bolt, TO excep. the
speaker from the denunciation of coun.
sci in his decision.
IF there was any robbery, was not
guilty of it," exclaimed MIR. Davis. He
claimed to have obtained an additional
$4,000 for the land sold to the OahI
Railway and Land Company, saying he
was threatened with being sent TO
prison for his exertions in that regarq
Mr.. Humphreys interjected state
ment that the company had offered to
pay $4,000 more for the property before
MIR. Davis took Mr.. Summers case, Mr..
Davis retorted: We'll. | saved him
$4,000 even according to that statement,
which paid my fee and Mr.. Magoon's
fee. That was the whole howl. | pre-
vented the corporation from selling q
strip of land to which IL was not en-.
titled"
a. S. Humphreys asked that the de.
cree be made to include certain dec.
laration in the courts oral decision.
Judge De Bolt. answering all re.
marks, said he saw mo reason for
changing his decision.
j. A. Magoon then read the form OF
the decree, to which Mr.. Davis object.
ed that II did not show on its face tina:
there had been an accounting. T. Nc
Giants Stewart said an accounting made
no difference, The money had been
! paid into court and thereby accounted
for. How could the trustee be dis
charged. unless that necessary conhi.
ton were shown upon the face OF the
decree?
Mr.. Humphreys offered to file an APP
peal to the Supreme Court from the de,
cree, but Judge De Bolt said there could
be no appeal until the decree wa.
signed. The Judge directed the clerl
to make the amendment suggested by
Mr.. Davis.
Mr.. Davis submitted that whenevei
the decree was signed the none,
should be paid over there (tapping tn,
table In front OF him). They had
lien on the money for compensation
until the fees were paid. ut is no us
talking fairly to Your Honors face an,
then going round the community rails
ing the devil about your treatment o
u.s."
Judge De Bolt desired the bar to b.
courageous. For his part nothin.
could be said to intimidate him. Whel
he disagreed with the bar he would de
eide the matter as he thought right.
Mr.. Davis said he only wanted I,
clear his own skirts. He reverted L
the case then, submitting that an APP
peal did not lie from decree In equt,
any more than II stayed an execution
Mr. Humphreys could not appear nov
for an appeal, because he had appeare,
for Sumner in the land transaction.
Mr.. Stewart while Mr.. Davis wa
searching for pages of authorities, re
lated stories of some of the large fee
paid attorneys by corporations In tn
States. w. NJ. Ewarts received a quar-
ter OF million for one word In answe
to question. The $4,000 paid to tn
present Attorney General, Mr.. KnoS
when retained as associate counsel wit
General Harrison and other instance
were given, Mr.. Stewart concludin
with the remark that fees were gen
orally dependent upon the ability OF tn
client to pay and the magnitude of tn
interests involved
Il have made my decision" Judg
De Bolt quietly observed.
Your Honor Is not at the bar now.
returned Mr.. Davis, You get your sal
airy regularly from the United State
. Government"
Judge De Bolt made a remark abou
/. the disparity between the salary OF
Judge and the Income of a member {
|. the bar with fair practice, when NJ
Davis said he knew the salaries of OF
4 judges were inadequate and he ha
n urged that fact at Washington.
Mr.. Davis proceeded with his mai
argument, the court having signed Il
decree and the appeal having been file
His contention was that the Hawalia
statutes contained no provision of
procedure for appeals from DEGREES
r equity, Therefore the practice must
modelled on that Of the High Court
ChancerJ' in England. The New Je
8 sey law expressly made that Englii
tribunal the guide In matters of equi
= wherein the State law was silent. /
strongly contended that there was
appeal for the Ellises in this case, b
- ,lJJ, %O0 RaIf Go, G