Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1903-07-27

son received a fee of $4,000 from said
J. X. Sumner according to the state
uent of said A. s. Humphreys, Tor
ner property, never having examined
tie title to ascertain whether 1t was
tie subject of any disposition. They
never made the trust deed, and said
a. S. Humphreys acknowledged that
they ought not to retain all of the
said s2.5O0, and proposes to pGy the
portion not earned, not TO Sumner, to
whom II belongs, but to the Ellises,
and this does not appear worthy Of
notice by the Attorney General as an
Improperly. Here again the conduct
cf the Attorney General is inConsist
ent, or he had inadvertently overlook
ed the matter, or IL may be that he
considers that the action of said
Humphreys, Thompson & Watson IL
rot improper because they have offer.
cd to repay the money TO persons who
had no right to It. this would make
the failure by an attorney to offer to
return all or portion Of cXtOrtiOnato
fees the offense, and not the taking
OF such fees.
| As to the charge Of taking excessive
foe. contained in said information, re.
srOndent Is again unable to under.
stand the attitude OF the Attorney
General. when on the Goth day OF June
1903. in reporting upon the conduct Of
George A. Davis, he used the follow
ing language: In regard to the case
OF George A. Davis, while criticism
might be INDUCED as to his methods
and the amount OF fee charged by
him to Maria S. Davis for his services
Yet, these are matters between the at.
tCrney and client, and upon which no
charges can be based In the absence
G. objections by the client"
In calling the Courts attention to
the position taken by the Attorney
General in this information, which
appears to respondent to be inConsist.
Cnt with his prior utterances and
acts. respondent wishes 1t to be dis.
ttnctly undcrtood that he has no de-.
sire to attack the character of the At.
ltorncy General for honesty and intcg.
rity. for respondent entertains tho
highest opinion OF him in this regard
hut It certainly does emphasize the
fact that no one is perfect and no mat
ter how honest his purpose. everyone
Is liable to make mistakes, though In
this case. respondent cannot discover
ally mistake of commission that he
has made in dealing with the several
L,atters OF the said J. X. Sumner. But
II the ROpert.Sumncr suit, though re-.
IspOndCnt worked in season and out Of
season and day and night, and loft his
sick bed and attended court while a
high fever was upon hun, aud while
he could scarcely hold up his head.
respondent feels, as he feels In every
case, that he has ever tried, as he
views them In the retrospect, not
that he would have done any less, but
that he might have done more to ad.
client.
That at the time the said petition
Ito put said J. X. Sumner under guar.
dianship now pending was filed, re.
spondent, hearing that 1t had been
filed, and believing that the service
OF the same upon said J. X. Sumner.
without a word OF warning. when he
was entirely unprepared for such &C.
ton, might have serious results upon
this old gentleman. respondent, of his
own motion. obtained n delay in the
81 ryice Of same, until such time as no.
tice could be sent to him at a distance
OF about twelve miles from Honolulu.
SO that the news Of the proceedings
might be broken gently to him by
members of his household.
That at the time OF the filing OF said
petition and injunction was prayed
for to restrain the said J. X. Sumner
from taking said SiS,O25 from the
clerk of the Court In case of a deci.
sion favorable to said J. h. Sumner
Gy this Supreme Court. That respond.
cnt appeared and resisted the same
and the injunction was denied. That
thereafter, respondent drew up and
fled u motion to dismiss the said pc.
| ition, and after full argument on the
same. said motion was granted
whcrcupOn respondent drew up and
flied an order Diminishing the said pc.
tition. That thcreupon the said petit
toner appealed to this Supreme Court
which appeal is now pending. That
II the action of said J. r. De Bolt DO
sustained, the matter will be ended.
but II II be reversed, the matter will
be sent back to the Circuit Court Tor
trial and respondent believes that tho
Issues raised by said petition could
not be tried in less than ten days. and
n light very easily take twice that time,
I'll OF which work IL IL incumbent up
or respondent to do without etra
charge.
That as to the fee OF 5000 mention.
cd In paragraph ~ of the information.
which fee was paid TO George a. la.
Wis, and OF which respondent re.
ceiycd $4,000, respondent has to say
that In view OF all the circumstances
surrounding the matter in which the
said fee was paid, II was not exces.
SIVa mr. imnrnnnr