Evening journal., 1906-08-18
SPENT OWN MONEY
|TOPROTECTESTATE
In Final Petition TO ChanCery
Court James II. HOffeCker
Makes Strong Points
HOPES FOR REINSTATEMENT
Special to The Evening Journal.

Special to The Evening Journal.
DOVER. Aug. ls-E,ddence continues
to come into the Supreme Court that there
must have been some mistake in the dis
barment OF James H. Horecker. the vii
mington chanccry lawyer who was dis
barred by order Of the chancellor and
which decree the Supreme court sus-
tanned.
Mr.. Hofeckers lawyers. Former Sem
ator Higgins. Former Attorney General
Ward and Horace c. Eastburn are taking
great pains and full advantage under the
new opportunity afforded them by the
Supreme Court which has allowed the dis
barred lawyer the rare opportunity OF
coming into court and showing cause
why his case should not be re-opened
and remanded to the court below for a re
hearing.
1t appears afhrmatively from the new
evidence in the case that in addition 10
the $4,000 invested in behalf Of the Teas
estate (the dwindllng of which IN his
hands from $1,000 10 almost nothing
| brought about the disbarment Of Mr.
4 Homecker by the Court of Chancery) MIR
/ Homecker individually advanced during
the succeeding months, for the operation
Of the company a total of cash out OF ms
| personal funds amounting to the sum Of
! S1S3l9.17. In addition TO cash so advanced
in endeavoring to make the investment
Of the funds secure and profitable MIR
Homecker lent his personal credit for the
purpose of financing the company SO
that he was finally obligated upon the
notes OF the company TO the extent OF
5000.
1t appears. therefore that in add tlon
To the investment in behalf Of the Teas
estate Mr.. Hoffecker individually either
paid in cash or procured by his endorse
ment upwards OF $4,000 for the benefit OF
said company, and for the purpose oi
making the Teas estate investment pro
duotive.
In the final petition Of Mr. Honecker'i
counsel for this act OF remandng at th'
hands OF the Supreme Court so that tn
appellant may go into the courts below
again and stand a new trial on the merit
Of the new evidence, the counsel for NJ,
Homecker say:
: 1T is respectfully submitted that th
new affidavts now presented to the cour
wholly relieve Mr.. Honecker from an.
charge Of bad faith or fraud in connectiu
with these two investments. which wer
the chief investments made by him who
, have been objected to, and that there no,
remains no semblance OF a basis upo
, which to found his dlsbarment, il It shou
n be to any extent based upon bad faith @
fraud.
e 1T is further submitted that under IN
2 authorities cited in the original brief
I behalf Of the appellant, or in the brief
t the proponents of the rule TO show caus
n no disbarment can. under the law /
Z pronounced against Mr. Homeckor witt
out proof and very clear proof of ba
faith or fraud.
q "The plain question is. therefore. no
q submitted to the court whether or not
r member Of the bar shall he d'sbarred G.
I acts done or investments made by hii
as trustee, when IT afhrmative.y appear
II that such acts or investments are n.
from any taint of bad faith or fraud O
the part of such member of the bar.
T. "The court is respectfully referred +,
II the law upon this proposition to the cas-,
i. cited upon appellants original brief.
e Horace C. Eastburn.
Herbert II. Ward.
Anthony Higgins.
Counsel for APPELLANT
Crab soup. Tonight. Laws, Fouri
and Ebfu1nN cfrnpfc