Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1908-08-06
Subsidized Press "Vlndication," That Is a
Virtual Plea of Guilty.
A Specious Reasoning Analysed. Whv Did Not
Judge Irwin Try the Last Case of the Widow
Stevens? The SearChlight of Anal
ysis on Abe1s Mythical Column
bia River Land

900, and note and mortgage made
by one GOuchner, son-in-law of Cath
erlne stevens. Some time after this.
when the Thomas Stevens estate was
SO that it could be closed--the John
stevens contract having been dis
posed Ola complaint was made that
Scott Stevens had defrauded his
mother out of her interest in the es-
state, and objection to the Scott Stew
ems fnal report was filed by j. A.
Hutcheson, who also brought suit to
cancel the Cathrine Stevens sale.
When the final report came on for
nearing, the court held that the pro-
bate court had no power to set aside
the sale because it was not probate
sale, and stated in open court that
the guardian of Catherine Stevens
ought to bring suit to set aside the
sale. Mr.. Hutcheson, attorney for the
guardian, said in open court that he
had done this.
When this suit was set for trial.
w. II. Abel objected to Judge Irwin
trying the case, and a visiting Judge.
Judge Linn, was called in and heard
the case, and decided in favor of
Scott Stevens and w. H. Abel. There
fore, it seems the Herald has made a
very One-sided statement. Judge Ir-
win did not try the case. 1t would
| also seem that the charge of favorit-
ism to W. H. Abel by Judge Irwin is
effectually disposed of since it ap-
pears that Abel objected to Judge IT.
win trying the case.
1T is only fair that the voters of
this county be not misled by the par
tial statement of facts, with many
false differences thrown in, as print
ed in the Herald.
wv. H. Abel has been asked for his
connection with this matter and said
that he merely sold a quarter Sec
tion of land to Scott Stevens with a
mortgage as part payment, and later
| AAAS AAACi e6uoS was pau Iudt uc NEVER
received a dollar of the estates mon
ey, either as attorney fees or other
wise
In this "Vindication," the Abel
| statement published in the Herald
was that of Attorney J. A. Hutcheson,
counsel for the despoiled widow. Di-
vested of its mere verbiage, this win
dicatiOn" makes but two real points.
The first and leading one is that
| Judge Irwin did not try the case;
| and the second, that Abel gave 160
acres of land as consideration for
the $4,000 he secured from the son
| of the robbed widow.
Let us analyZe those statements
fairly, and see if they are not the
plain makeshifts of the pettifogger,
and in doing so we ask the reader to
remember that the charges were
made by Attorney Hutcheson, and
constitute a part of the record of
the case, and are not newspaper sto-
ries or rumors. Take the first, that
Judge Irwin called a visiting judge
to try the case, on ABEL'S MOTION,
to which counsel for the widow un-
avaiingy protested and two prob
lens are presented: Why did Abel
do so, and why did Judge Irwin
grant the motion? For solution,
it is necessary to revert TO the rec
ord
1t will be remembered that Mr..
Hutcheson'S brief in the case, recit-
ed that Judge Irwin had appointed
Scott r. Stevens administrator; that
this unnatural son kept his mother
isolated for a year and a half, re-
fusing his married sisters the privil-
ege of seeing or ministering to their
stricken mother, and that they then
| endeavored to have the mother de-
clared incompetent and guardian
appointed. That Abel successfully
resisted this attempt before Judge r.
win, in December, 1904, and that in
April, 1905-four months later
the son succeeded in wrestling from
his mother a deed to her interest in
her farm to him and in inducing her
to sell her Aberdeen home at low
figure. The deed to her interest in