Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1913-09-27

Of the bar to contend that words spo-
ken concerning the Judge and not In
the presence of the court or Judge do
not constitute contempt of court. l
canaot, however. rely upon that posi-,
lien nor is il my intention so to do.
! believe that Judge is entitled to
respectful consideration both in and
ont OF court and an officer Of the
court is reprehensible whenever he
forgets that duty. and do not wish
therefore to rely upon any legal tech
nicality in. this matter. As herein
after pointed out / feel that certain
statements made by me concerning
the Honorable John Albert Matthew
man, judge of the circuit court Of the
third circuit, we're incorporate and
inconsiderate and hereby express
my extreme regret for such state
ments.
THE AFFIDAVIT OF Mr.. C. H.
MBRIDE.
In discussing this affidavit feel
that che character and conduct Of Mr..
Mcbride are so well known to the
committee, that no undue weight or
influence viii be attached to any
statements made by him under oath
or otherwise; sufficient it is for me
to say that Mr.. Mcbride, as am In
formed and believe, has frequently
made the statement that as I had
been active in trying to secure his
disbarment for misconduct (which
statement is absolutely untrue) he In.
tended to get even" with me and
therefore filed these charges.
Before Mr.. Mcbride filed his
Manuel De Mello, juror OF the Third
circuit of the April term, to make an
affidayit in support of his charges
containing statements absolutely
without foundation in fact, and threat
ened Mr.. De Mello that II he refused
to make the affidavit he (McBride) 4
would have De Melio arrested on q
charge Of larceny, which charge. upon
the refusal of Mr.. De Mello to make
the affidavit, was sworn to by Mr..
Mcbride before the district magfs-
trafe at Kailua and De Mello was ar.
rested, nolIe prosequi being subse-
quently entered when the case came
on for hearing. | mention this not
for the purpose of making charge
against Mr. Mcbride but to show that
HIS charges against me we're not &C
tuated by any sense of duty to the
court, but were the result Of personal
animosity. This luminosity on the
part Of Mr.. Mcbride against myself
has existed since the year 1909, when
l was compelled to eject Mr.. Mcbride
from my Office after his proposal to
me to supply me with copies of let
tiers written by Governor Frear,
whose private secretary he then was.
concerning matters in litigation in
which was at that time vitality in
terested. Since 1909 have unfort-
unately been compelled to have bust
ness dealings with Mr.. Mcbride, al
most all Of which have been attended
with personal friction and which have
resulted In widening the breach be-
tween us; and 1t is no matter Of sur
prise to me that Mr.. Mcbride, in pur-
suance or his plan to get even, has
made statements in his afldavit
which ere grossly untrue and without
foundation in fact.
Referring particularly to the affiday-
it Of Mr.. Mcbride, I admit the facts al
legged IN paragraphs /, 2.s, 5. s and
I thereof.
1 deny each and every allegation
contained in paragraph s of said affi-
davit and further answering said par
agraph / desire to say:
entered my appearance IN the third
circuit court at the request of c. w
Ashford, Esq, entirely without fee or
in a cause then pending
IN said court wherein Hattie Bartels
was libeIlant and #. w. Bartels was
libellee. This was an action for di-
vorce filed by Mr.. Ashford on behalf
Of the libellant and in which the libel
had been demurred to and the de-
murrer sustained; motion for the all
lowance of alimony pendente lite, suit
money and counsel fee had also been
filed and overruled An amended libel
was filed, demurred to and the demur-
rer sustained. A second amend
libel had been filed, demurred
to and a second, motion for temporary
alimony, suit money and counsel fee
had also been filed, and 1t was upon
the second amended libel and the sec
ond motion that / appeared as counsel;
the demurrer to the second amended
libel was sustained and the motion
overruled. Mr.. Ashford is we'll known
at the bar, and his ability and care In
pleading Is considered to be of the first
order, and am free to confess that
when the demurrer to the second
amended libel was sustained and the
second motion for alimony, etc. was
overruled, was extremely angry and
felt that the rulings were not war
ranted by the law and the facts as set
out in the pleadings.
Immediately after the rulings on the
second amended libel and the motion
above referred to ! went out on the
of the court and was followed
by Mr.. Mcbride, who made the follow
ing statement TO me:
81 say, Joe, got it on you there. For
some time l had the. little gink where
/ wanted him tadding vulgar express
sion). Lately, however, he has been
sticking 1t into me, but still have him
on the Bartels case as you see; know
that the decision was - rotten and
/ was as much surprised as you" To