The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1910-01-07
HUSBAND STILL
WITHOUT WIFE
Petition for Writ Of Habeas
Corpus Quickly Dismissed
by Robinson.
CFrom Wednesdays Advertiser,

(From Wednesdays Advertiser.l
The writ of habeas corpus granted
Monday by Judge De Bolt on the petit
ton of Omar David Conger and d.
rected to Thomas W. and William T.
Rawlins, ordering them to produce in
court at two o clock yesterday after
noon the body of Ada F. Conger, nee
Rawlins, was dismissed yesterday after
noon by Judge Robinson, before whom
the matter came up for hearing, and
as result of the dismissal, r. W.
Breckons, appearing as counsel for the
respondents, stated in open court that
he would consult with the attorney
general with view to having Conger
arrested on charge of perjury.
The case is a peculiar one in many
ways, and the statements of the petit
toner and the respondents are dia-
metrically opposite in character.
When Judge Robinson took his seat
on the bench yesterday and asked if
the two sides were ready to proceed,
both answered in the affirmative. At
torney Straus then proceeded to read
the petition for the writ of habeas
corpus, the gist of which was published
in The Advertiser yesterday, and the
answer of the respondents. The gist
of the answer was that they denied
that the girl was imprisoned or re-
strained of her liberty; that she was
not hidden but was residing with her
parents of her own free will and ac-
cord and at her own request They
49, h. Il %
in court for the reason that they had
refused to come, preferring to remain
she was physically unable to appear in
court.
Husband on Stand.
Upon reading the answer Straus
moved for a continuance until this
morning in order that he might have
time to traverse the answer, which he
said he could not, of course, be expected
to have anticipated.
R. w. Breckons and A. G. NJ. Robert
son appeared to represent Rawlins,
pere and fils. Breckons objected to
any continuance, claiming that the petit
toner should have his witnesses in
court to prove his allegations. A long
for a continuance was denied by Judge
Robinson right off the bat, however,
without prejudice. Straus then called
Conger to the stand.
The bereaved husband proved to be
poor witness. He began by identify
ing the marriage license which was
shown him and stating that Ada f.
Conger, nee Rawlins, was his wife.
Straus asked him when he last saw
his WIFE, The witness replied that it
was at the house of Mr.. and Mrs. F. w.
Kennedy on Kalakaua avenue, and that
there were present at that time Mrs.
Kennedy, Tom Kennery, Mrs. Rawlins,
mother of the bride, and her older
sister. This was between three and
four O'Clock on Saturday afternoon.
Took OFF His Coat.
At that time W. T. Rawllns arrived
in an automobile accompanied by
chauffuer He came in and asked for
man named Conger. Conger said he
was the man, and Rawlins wanted to
know what he meant by breaking his
word and going against the family.
Conger denied that he had broken his
word, and explained that he had not
acquainted the girls father with the
Mrs. Conger herself expressly requested
it. Besides, he said, it was none of
Rawlins business, as the gill was of
age.
Rawlins, said the witness, half took
off his coat and asked the husband
whether or not he would permit the
girl to return to the home of her par
ents. Conger refused to permit this.
Rawlins then turned to the girl and
said, "Who will answer to father for
thisa"
"I WILL" replied the girl. ard she
consented to go home to see her father.
"I Will Come Back
"In the house before she went, and
on the steps, and after she got into
the automobile,'' said Conger, "sbe
said to me Omar, / will come back. -
But on cross-examination it was
brought out that Conget's reason for
believing that the girl was restrained
of her liberty was the fact that she
had not come back. ''She said she
would Gomez walled the husband,
"and she hash t come. And she al
ways told me the truth, so / know she
is held there Conger also stated
that Mr.. and Mrs. Berger vert to the
be allowed to see Mrs Conger, but we're
refused. This testimony was promptly
ruled out by Judge Robinson.
wouldn't Subpoena Witnesses.
Attorney Straus then requested that
subpoenas be issued for Mr.. and Mrs.
Berger. He said he had never heard
their names until that moment, and, of
course, could not be expected to have
them present in court. The Judge re-
fused to have them summoned. Straus
then asked that subpoena be issued
for Mrs. conger herself, Robinson re-
fused this, too,
straus made his argument in support
OF his motion, and contend1d that be
should be given time to gather the
witnesses be needed, His arguments
were opposed by both Breekons aud
Robertson, Judge Robinson deciding in
the words, "the writ Is dismissed, 4"