The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1907-09-30
DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS;
LORRTN ANDREWS. RE-
SPONDENT.

There were dramatic scenes in tn
u. s. Court again this morning, whel
Mr.. Lorrin Andrews attended to an
swer the citation issued by the Judge
| iTp ugnipg his professional conduct
The case attracted a. great deal of In
terest, all available seats being occu
pied by interested listeners of Amer
| lean and other nationality who evil
/ IDENTIFY sympathized with Mr.. Andrews
for they cheered him as he left the
court at the close of the mornings pro.
ceedings.
| The Judge intimated that he was
ready to hear Mr.. Andrews.
Mr. G. Musso rose and said that
as the citation on Mr.. Andrews in
cluded his name. and he represented
Mr.. Price in that court. he wished for
an opportunity to address the court.
His Honor: You will be given an
opportunity to be heard after Mr.. An
drews makes his statement.
Mr. Andrews: In answer to the cita-
ton first wish to file a demurrer to
said citation.
Mr.. Andrews then put in the follow
ing demurrer:
DEMURRER TO CITATION.
emit therein and demurs to the citation
filed in the above entitled court on the
9th day of August, 1907, on the follow
ing grounds:
THAT it appears from said cita-
ton that the court has no jurisdiction
over the person of the respondent; in
that it does not show that respondent
is or ever was an officer of this court.
2.-That the court has no jurisdic-
ton over the subject matter set forth
in said citation, in that the proceeding
as set forth is q matter now pending
in the Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals,
and beyond the jurisdiction of this
court.
I. 3.-That the court has no jurisdic-
ton In that the citation and exhibits
show that at the times mentioned re-
spondent was not an officer OF this
court, and that the alleged proceed
ings were not proceedings in this court,
but of another court of competent 5u-
risdiction.
4.-That the court has no jurisdic-
ton of the said subject matter of said
citation in that the citation shows that
the Judge OF said court is an interested
party in the charges set forth, and the
accuser of said respondent charging
him with criminal offence in said CT
tation. and as such is preciuded from
judging said case.
5.-That the citation does not state
facts sufficient to constitute charge
against respondent.
Wherefore respondent demands that
the citation be dismissed as against
him and for his costs in his action.
Mr.. Andrews said he submitted that
document. He did not wish TO argue
1T. but left it in the hands of the court.
His Honor said the demurrer would
be filed. Did Mr.. Andrews wish TO
stand on the demurrer?
Mr. Andrews: I desire ruling on
the demurrer. IF the court rules
against me, then l win file an answer.
His Honor: The court will take the
matter of the demurrer under consid-
Grafton, and pass upon it at the ear
lest possible date. The court has de-
ci6ed to take a vacation during next
month. It is not certain that the court
can take the matter up before October.
Mr.. Andrews said His Honor had
himself drawn the citation and His
Honor had signed the citation. The |
facts in the demurrer were not. such !
as to require long investigation. They |
appeared on the face of it. He was |
not asking for time in this matter. He /
was anxious for the matter to be heard |
and he wished to protect his legal |
rights. in view of the circumstance /
that His Honor appeared as judge and