The Hawaiian gazette., 1911-10-06
NOL.PROs
IN APPEAL CASE
Withdrawal Of Appeal and Prom
Ise Of Restitution Excite
cathCarts Sympathy.
Iron Wednesday, Adveiilaer.l


appeals against sentence Of three
sld two months respectively for gross
cheat. Defendant withdrew his appeal
in the case where he got three months
and a nolle prOsequi was entered in tho
other.
Anderson IL was who had a wonder.
full secret that he was willing TO sell
for $3.50. The purchaser Of this secret
would become an expert photographer
and thereby earn lot Of money. l..
II. Reynolds purchased the right to
ride on the royal road to expertness
per medium of the vehicle that Ander-
son would sell him. The purchaser was
sold.
Anderson also had another interest
ing experimenting device. For 5000
he was going to make Japanese
named Tomosaimai an expert draughts-
man.
The district court was skeptical re-
garding the efficacy of the means sold
and sentenced Devere Anderson to
three months on the first and two
months on the second charge. Accord
ingly he appealed and the matters were
taken up yesterday
City Attorney Cathcart appeared for
the prosecution and s. +. Chillingworth
for the defense.
Attorney Chillingworth indicated
that the appeal had been withdrawn
and that restoration of the 5000 would
be made to the Japanese.
Attorney Cathcart did the gracious
thing He would not be behind in the
Seeing that Anderson
had withdrawn his appeal, and that
there had been an assertion that the
5000 would be repaid, he would sug-
gest that the second case be nolle
Judge Cooper acted on the sugges-
ton, and now Anderson has three
months only to serve.
An Antiquity Disposed OF.
Temporarily at least the calendar of
Judge Whitucy's court was yesterday
ridded of a long-standing affair, for
the jury after about an hour s delibera-
ton gave verdict for $2074.25 in the
case of Henry Gumpfer VS.. +. B.
Within, damage suit which arose out
Of an accident.
This accident is said to have hap
pened six years ago. The plaintiff was
in his hack and an automobile owned
by the defendant ran into the hack.
The plaintiff was thrown out and sus-
tanned some very serious injuries. He
chained 1870 for the injuries he had
received.
The defendant was away at the
time, and is still in fact. He claimed
that the machine was not his, but his
wife's, who also employed the chauf-
feur that was driving the machine at
the time.
What good the verdict will do the
plaintiff was not stated, but it was felt
among those present that the plaintiff
would not benefit very much, seeing
that the defendant is still on the Coast.
Naturally the process of enforcing the
verdict would be a costly one.
Attorney Peterson gave notice of APP
peal
Biting Withdraws from Case.
I. Dye had an appeal before Judge
Cooper yesterday against conviction
in the district court for assault and
battery. Attorney Biting appeared for
the defendant, but withdrew from the
case. 1t was stated that the attorney
wanted his client to plead guilty. but
Dye objected to doing this, alleging thut
he was not guilty He was willing to
go to trial, jury waived.
The case was passed over.
Court Work to Be Rearranged.
Beginning with the new term in 1912
the work of the circuit judges viii be
rearranged. Under the new regime,
Judge Cooper will take civil jury cases,
jury waived cases and equity matters;
Judge Robinson viii take all criminal
eases, and Judge Whitney will take pro-
bate, divorce, habeas corpus, juvenile
court and land court.
Commission Evidence Wanted.
Judge Robinson yesterday granted an
order submitted by the Trent Trust
Company, to have the evidence of
Mathew Enos of Santa Cruz, taken by
commission. This is in connection with
the probate of the win of the late
Frank G. Enos.
A Greek Divorce.
Judge Robinson yesterday annulled
the marriage of Ligory Poulos with
Mary Poulos on the grounds of her mis-
conduct.
Justice Disqualified.
On Monday argument was heard in
the case William w. Bruner VS.. G. Brew
err & Co., Ltd, which was before the
supreme court on error to circuit cout,
first circuit. The defendants suggested
that the chief justice was disqualified
from sitting in the case, because his
father IS estate had pecuniary interest
in the defendant corporation, and that
Justice De Bolt was disqualified because
he had made an order referring the
issues in the original case to arbitra-
tors in accordance with the terms of the
stipulation.
Justice Perry gave the opinion, and
in it he stated that the chief Justice
had informed the court, and this was
found to be the case, that his father
estate did not own any of the stock
referred to. The question of whether
Justice De Bolt had also been dis
qualified was then taken up.