The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1910-12-17

Camara pointed out that Harrison
had received 81. 25 on account of the
fifteen dollars from the Honolulu Con-
struction and Draying Company, which
was named as garnishee and which
held S5 belonging to the defendant. 1t
was alleged that Harrison had collect
ed the 81. 25 before the court had rul-
ed on the garnishee and this was con-
Tempt of court, but Judge Lymer held
that though it was rather a strange
proceeding on the part of Harrison it
did not amount to contempt of court.
Harrison claimed that he did not
approach the Construction Company
in the matter but that. the manager of
the company told him to take, the
money and let him have no trouble
about it, and Harrison did so, holding
the money pending judgment
This statement Mr.. Camara chal-
lenged. adding that he could produce
witnesses to show that Harrison had
visited the Office of the company to
collect the money.
Harrison-"If l had done that
would be guilty of gross cheat; that is
not contempt of court"
Judge Lymer remarked that the pre-
sent time was hardly the time for
bringing up such matter, unless Ca
mara wished the court to take note of
the matter. He was trying an action
for recovery OF money on two promis-
sorry notes
Harrison then moved that the de-
: Tense alleging that the notes were
! signed on the understanding that he
was TO get Gouveia a divorce be struck
out on the ground that such a defense
was an attempt on the part of the de-
, PENDANT to introduce into a written
| contract verbal statements, which
were not there on the face of it, but
Judge Lymer overruled that objection
on the ground that the allegations
made were in support of the consider
alton for which the note was issued.
The third paragraph of the defense
showed that the divorce proceedings
failed.
Harrison took the stand and com
menced to outline the nature of the
relations between himself and the de
PENDANT, stating that he charged de
PENDANT $25 in connection with an ac
ton brought against Gouveia of threat
ening language, and $40 for the di
vorce proceedings, of which he had re
ceived on account $26, leaving a bal
ance due of $39 on that account and
SIS in connection with an assault case
but he was stopped by Judge LymeI
who pointed out that the notes were
prima facie evidence of the case and
that Harrison had better wait until
the defence had been put in before
he went on with his story, which
could then be put in by way of rebut
tai.
In cross-eXamination Harrison said
he did not make any statement to de
PENDANT to the effect that if the di
vorce was not granted he would moi
collect the money que on the promis
sorry note.
Camara-"Did you have any con
versation with defendant in which ml
name was mentioned?''
Harrison-"Yes! Yes; he said yol
told him that ! did not know my bust
ness that did not know how to draw
up a complaint, that the libel ] ha(
served was not proper service, tina
you could take him to lawyer wh'
would get him a divorce in ten mi
nutes and thar could never get hin
one There were several other scan
dalous statements"
Camara-"Did he not tell you that
told him he could not get divorce Of
the libel filed?"
Harrison-"Yes."
Camara-"What was your answer?
Harrison-'I told him that the libe
would sustain a divorce if he had suf
ficient evidence to prove it,
Camara-"What else was said abou
me?"
HARRISON think l told him this
you were running for Andrews an
that you were making scandalou
statements owing 10 your ignoranc
of the matter and your ignorance
professional etiquette"
Judge Lymer asked what the que
lions were leading up to and Camal
said they were to show that Harriso
knew that the libel was faulty and thi
defendant after consultation with A
drews and Camara went back to Ha
rison and told him so, and Harrisc
then went on with the case on Il
libel and it was dismissed
John c. Quintal, defendants brothe
81 - II Il