The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-01-03

I saved him from that, so he gave Mrs
Davis who was poor and homeless heI
share.
| rs that why you brought the pro-
ceeding?" asked Humphreys.
| Never you mind" shouted Davis
angrily advancing with cIenched fist
upon his brother attorney, that is none
OF your business, I don't have to an
| swer to you. You might control some
people but you can't control me-" Davis
subsidized when admonished by the
court.
Humphreys replied to Davis contend
ing that the deed and will were in
| separable and that the Ellises We're
heirs to the old mans property and
| consequently interested in it's disposi-
ton. He contended also that the deed
was irrevocable, there being no specific
power given in the document.
Magoon replied, though stating that
he questioned the advisability of
Davis's motion during the courae OF
the trial. He contended however that
the proof Of the plaintiff had not been
sufficient, and that the suit should be
dismissed.
Davis afterwards renewed his motion
and made another that the $4S,o25 be
paid Immediately to Summer, there be-
ing nothing to show that this was part
OF the trust He argued that the $110,-
600 had been paid to the trustee and by
him turned over to Sumner, and was
therefor no longer subject to the pro-
visions OF the trust deed
Davis directed most of his argument
to Humphreys, saying he wanted to
keep Humphreys and his clients, who
had already enjoyed $4,000 of the trust
and $1,000 attorneys fees, from getting
any of the $4S, 600. He contended also
that to be entitled to equity the ElIises
must do equity, and they had no right
to come into court until they had paid
back into the trust the $50, 600 given
them.
Suppose the court holds that the
trust ceased to exist, how can the court |
have power to appoint another trustee |
unless by consent?" asked Judge De |
Bolt.
ST understand now, that Sumner |
doesn't want any trustee, simply wants
to get his $4,000 and get out of the
country to Tahiti
Albert Raas, cashier of the Oahu
Railway, was then called to the stand
by consent Of all parties, as he wished /
to give his testimony and then leave.
He produced in court the deed to the
reef property and the checks for $110,
900 given in payment for, it. There
were three checks all made out to
Gulstan F. Ropert as trustee of the fol-
lowing amounts, $94525. $9,925, and
S., 900. To make up the $1100 was a
check for. $3.50 to B. F. Dillingham;
which was the amount of the stamps
upon the deed, and which
Sumner paid. Both checks and deed
were left with the court. There was no
cross examination of this witness, he
having been put on the stand by Hum
phreys.
1t was at this point that Humphreys
made the suggestion that the deed Of
the Oahu Railway was questionable,
as no power was given to the trustee
to sell the property.
Judge De Bolt overruled the motion
IF Davis to strike out the names Of
he Ellises and gave no decision as to
he disposition of the $48, 900. He said
his decision was not final, but he wish
ID to hear evidence. The court stated
also that he was forcibly impressed
With the weight of the argument to the
Effect that the trust had been terminal
I'd. and would throw out this intinla-
ion for what it was worth. He stated
'urther that he believed Sumner was
entitled to his money. but said he was
still open to conviction to the contrary.
rhe ruling upon none of the points was
made final. but there was strong senti-
nent running through all Of the days
proceedings. that Judge De Bolt intend l.
ID to return Summers property.
Following the ruling Wyllie Davis
vas put on the stand by Magoon. His
was to a conversation he
lad had with Mrs. Buffandeau to the
effect that she and her brothers were
o relinquish all claims upon the es- =
ate in consideration of the payment OF
10. 600 each This seems the chief point
# contention. Sumner claims that he
las settled with his nephews by the
payment Of his money, and now should
'e allowed his liberty. The trial of the
ase will be resumed this morning.