Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1905-04-15
Mago0n Denies All
Allegations of
UnprofessionaIism
REVIEWS CASE...ASKS FULL YINDICATION

Attorney J. Alfred Magoon. in the
matter of disbarment proceedings
against himself. today makes return
to information, in part to the follow.
ing effect:
He denies allegations Of professional
improprieties. malpractice and gross
misconduct and alleges that he has al.
ways conducted himself in an bonora.
BILE manner.
No Hustace Fee.
He denies that he accepted from Hus.
tace retaining fee in the matter of
advising Hustace how he could escape
from full liability of judgment and
brands the charge as utterly false and
malicious; $3.50 was paid to him for
a perfectly Legitimate purpose; not on
ly was the conduct Of respondent prop.
err but 1t involves Jelf.sacrifice. That
IN all that respondent did in the matter
he tried to live as nearly as he could
according to the golden rule DO unto
others as ye would that they should
do unto YOU" and he denies that in
any act performed BY him In this mat
ter, or in any other matter during his
professional career here Of nearly TWEEN.
ty years he has been guilty of any
professional misconduct.
Mereiful to Enemy.
That as to the charge Of improperly
contained in said paragraph ", re.
spondent has to say that II to be merci.
iul to ones enemy makes one guilty
OF improperly, respondent must plead
guilty TO this charge. Frank Hustace
Was respondents foe In the Kamalo H..
t,gation. He was vanquished and came
Lieading to respondents client for mer.
Cy. There was no help for him from
any source except from the Kamalc
Sugar Company. respondents client
In this helpless condition the com
pany brought Hustace to respondent
and directed respondent TO assist him
That as to the charge that respond.
ent conspired to hinder, delay and de.
fraud the stockholders of the Kamalo
Sugar Company. he has to say that
" iAuHbd'N, WIN Nil'
oC the company, first came to respond
gnt 1t was with no expectation or idea
that Hustace would make a transfer OF
is property to any one, but to urge
the company before compelling Hus
tace to pay anything further under the
Judgment to exhaust the property of
Egan and Foster, which could not be
done except at large expense and de-
lay to the company. The delay, the
company was willing to submit to, pro.
vlded Hustace would bear the expense.
This lie agreed to do. and under these
conditions and no other, was respond.
ent directed by the company to try
and secure satisfaction out of the prop
orty of Egan and Foster before pro.
ceeding further against Hustace. But
n all these proceedings respondent was
to be In reality the attorney for the
kamaio Sugar Company. That II was
not until sometime after this arrange.
ment was made between the company.
Hustace and respondent that respond
ent. after several consultations with A,
q. NJ. Robertson, attorney of Frank
Hustace. came TO the conclusion that
the Kamalo Sugar Company could not
reach the property of Egan and Foster
as originally intended. that the sugges.
ton was made by respondent to Hus.
tace that nothing could be done for
him 80 long as he had property stand.
Ing In his name subject to be levied
On under execution, and that II he
would give a good and sufficient bond
or other satisfactory security that he
would pay whatever portion of the
judgment should remain unpaid after
oXhaustlng the property of Egan and
Foster, there would be no objection, so
tar as the Kamalo Sugar Company was
concerned to his making a transfer OF
his property so that the sheriff could
find nothing on which to levy; but that
al no time did the matter ever reach a
stage where respondent advised, or
could have advised said Frank Hustace
TO make such transfer, for the reason
that Frank HusiaCe never fulfilled the
condition on which respondent would
have under any possible circumstances
advised him to make such a transfer.
Acts All Know.
Everything that was done by re-
hpondent for the benefit of Hustace was
rot only with the knowledge of the
Eamalo Sugar Company, but with Its
express approval and direction; there
fore. In the judgment Of respondent his
acts are lacking in every one Of the
elements Of fraud.
Within Ratification.
Respondent has the written ratiiica
ton OF all his acts by every one Of th'
directors of the Kamalo Sugar Com
pOny.
That as to the charge that respond
ent conspired to hinder, delay and de
fraud the other creditors of Hustace
lac has to say that at the time whcr
be had the conversation with Hustac,
In which the transfer was suggested
10 was not conscious, and had NJ
knowledge, as far as he can now ~
member, that llustaco had any crodI
tors, The thought never occurred Il