The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1903-07-31
TRUCE TO ARGUMENT
IN THE MACON CASE


cred to the Attorney General
Witness said Sumner did not want
to ray Stewart anything but he adj
vised Sumner to pay him 500. Could
not remember the items OF Stewards
bill but Sumner asked him TO invest
igate ID. In answer to Justbee Perry
he said this business cost the time
of Several conversations" and might
have taken a day.
Was It twentyfour hours?" the
Attorney General asked.
! Lawyers do not ordinarily work
twenty-for hours" the respondent
answered with some asperity.
STILL MORE WORK.
Respondent had consulted with Lew
ers & Cookies bookkeeper about a lum-
Der bill; advised with w. N. Camp
bell, builder of Summers house: Camp
bell was not his client, though he drew
up deeds and mortgages for him.
Anything else, Mr.. Magoon?"
In answer to this question the re-
spondent emphaticany ventured a vim
| dication of his charge to Sumner.
SELF-vINDICATIoN
II will simply say right now" was.
his declaration, that for the Ropert-
Sumner suit alene that fee of $4,000 was:
fair fee. / would not take $4,000 for
the same work from any other man.
1t has nothing to do with Geo. Davis's
fee. L worked as hard as if Davis was
not in it at all. Davis went out and
told Sumner he could get that $4S.O25.
for him, and he did all that was in his
power for him, as did all that was in
my power
MRS. pAVIS'S PAYMENT.
: Witness admitted receiving $500 in a
former suit from Sumner and said he
worked at it about ten days, but that
had nothing to do with this case AS
legal proposition, Sumner had nothing
to do with that money. Geo. Davis got
it for Mrs. Maria S. Davis from b. F.
Dillingham; to procure the signing of
the deed to the harbor property.
THE BIG FEE.
1T is true Sumner offered me S25OO
| for my fee witness replied to a ques-
ton. He came to me to talk about
my fee. Up to that day L never had
said anything about my fee. He asked
me what l wanted and | said | would
prefer to leave it to him. His offer of
$500 was surprise to me, for l thought
he would offer me more than $4,000. He
never said a word when | proposed
$4,000 but that it was all right, and he
drew a check for $1,000, the other $4,000
coming from cash brought back by
Wyllie Davis. 1t was the most trying
| litigation in which l was ever engaged
during all my practice as an attorney.
Sumner relied on me as his attorney.
l wrote two receipts; made a mistake
! and put July instead of June"
QUIzZED TO FINISH.
Justices Galbraith and Perry, during
| most of Mr. Magoon's further time on
the stand, kept up a running fire of
questions. Justice Perry prodded his
recollection of two cases in which he
had appeared on the side of Summers
insanity. In the Crandall case he was
chief counsel, with Mr. Kinney as assoc
ciate; in the recevership, Kinney was
chief, and witness advised him Sumner
was not person contemplated as in
sane by the law, but one liable to be
imposed on. The latest occasion, 1902,
was entirely different from the former
ones, as many people changed sides on
the question of Summers mental condi-
ton. He had read the latest decision of
the Supreme Court, with its finding
that Sumner was of weak mind.
REMUNERATION AGAIN.
Justice Galbraith asked If respondent
had not in mind the payment of $4,000
to Geo. Davis when he asked for $4,000.
He answered that the entire $4,000 would
not have been an unreasonable fee for
the work. Davis did not get enough
If he had done all the work himself.
He would have considered $4,000 right
for himself
Justice Standardization the reason
you asked Sumner to fix the fee was
that Won tbouubt ba would s,iya you