The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1907-09-30
CONTINUED from page Five.)

CONTINUED from Page Ffve.)
1 q paper which respondent has neve
seen.
Il sth. Respondent further answering
denies that the court accepting ant
believing to be true the fact reclted il
your said petition and In the sait
! AFFIDAVIT of said Schlesinser, and bas-
ing it's action solely upon said infor.
nation, issued an order admitting said
/ Price to bail. Respondent, not being
gifted with mental telepathy, does not
know the reasons which guided the
tsaid court in it's decision to admit Mr.
Price TO bail, but believes that it did
so not for the reason set forth in this
/ citation, but because the order refus-
ing bail pending appeal made by the
| Judge of the United States for China,
Honorable Lebbeus r. Whitley was
unconstitutional, unprecedented and
an outrage upon an American citizen
and for these reasons in respondent
/ opinion and no other the court i'm
/ mediately ordered the release of said
Price upon bail, cabling such order to
the Court of Shanghai. Respondent
| has no knowledge as to the accuracy
!
ton. but claims that a reading of said
exhibit will show that the court Or
dered said Price to be admitted to
bail because bail had been refused
pending said appeal.
9Th Respondent further answering
| the said citation alleges that as to the
statement contained therein In the
alleged affidavit of said F. E. Hinck-
ley, Clerk for the United States Court
for China, that respondent was I'M
aware of said affidavit. had never seen
the same and has no information, ex-
cept as set forth IN this citation, that
said Hinckley made such an affidavit,
but respondent calls attention to the
fact that If the alleged petition of re-
spondent marked Exhibit "A'' is claim
ed to be correct by Honorable L. r
Whitley, Judge of the United States
Court for China, making this charge,
against your respondent, and the affi-i
davit of said F. e. Hinckley as quoted
in said citation Is claimed to be a corr
rect statement of an affidavit made by
him, within the jurisdiction of this
honorable court, then the said +. E.
Hinckley has wilfully and deliberately
committed the crime of perjury in that
he has sworn in said affidavit, as APP
pears in said citation, that said state
ment appearing in said petitions and
affidavits of Lorrin Andrews and Bert
Schlesinger, that the Clerk of the Unit
ed States Court for China refused and
still refuses to furnish or to certify or
transmit to this court transcript Of
the said cause, is a statement utterly
false and without foundation of fact.
That. contrary to the said false state
ment contained in said petitions and
affidavits, etc." wherein, as q matter
of fact, the alleged petition of respond
emit cited in said citation and marked
Exhibit AZ does not state in any por-
ton thereof that the Clerk of the Unit
ed States Court for China refused and
still refuses to furnish or to transmit
er certify TO this court a transcript of
the papers. proceedings and records
of said case, but does say, according
to said exhibit, merely that the judge
and the clerk of said court have
failed and neglected to transmit the
same or any of them..s Which is q
material difference and one to which
respondent calls the attention of the
court for such action as it deems
proper.
10th. And respondent further an |
swering the citation states that If said
F.. E. Hinckley made said affidavit |
within the knowledge of the court, on
the 4th day of April, 1907, as set forth
in Exhibit e. charging respondent
with the crime of perjury, that the
same must have been well known to
the judge of this court at that time;
and respondent further alleges that
the actions of respondent in connec-
ton with the case of S. r. Price We're
well known to said judge prior to the
18th day of June. 1907. and that said
judge had conversed with this re-
spontlent concerning the same That
ON the 18th day sof June, 1907, the !
judge of this court now charging re-
spondent with MORAL turpitude' in
connection with his actions while in
San Francisco in the matter of S. r.
Price. admitted respondent as a men,
bef of the United States Court for
China after an oral examination and
the presentation of papers proving
good Character. That the judge of said
court, who must at that time have welld
Known of the affidavit of said r. E. |
Hirckley made on the 4th day of April, |
1907, and who was fully acquainted
with all the acts of respondent in con-
nection with the case of S. r. Price, !
which occurred in February of that
year. made the following statement: |
MIR. Andrews has answered substan- !
TALLY all the questions of the examina-
ton correctly, he has fled with his
application endorsements of the high
est character. both for his personal
and professional integrity. These en-
dorsements come from prominent off,,
Gals in Washington. Brooklyn, New
York and Hawaii. and are in all re-
spects satisfactory. Mr.. Andrews will
be admitted to the bar That the
said F.. E. Hinckley was at that time
present in the courtroom and heard
the remarks of said judge, and neither
at that time nor at any other occasion
informed respondent that he, the said
Hinckley. charged him with making
false statements or committing the
crime of perjury. or with any other
accusation attacking his moral or pro-
fessional character.
9TH. That at that time or at no