Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1915-03-04

\ court anu IN so IdI as aiIOWc1 ld1ca
against the estate, the attorneys fees
for both parties to be presented to
the court and in so far as allowed To
be paid by the estate"
The following Ii reproduced as mem
oranda taken by stenographer during
conversation between Kinney and
Thompson on the compromise plan:
Mr.. Kinney: What provision for &C.
cess To the child and visiting and as.
sociation with the child. both on the
part OF the grandmother and Mr..
Smart? srGs
Mr.. Thompson: Each to have un.
limited access to the child.
Mr.. K. Surprising there Is dissat-
isfaction with the custodian or dissat-
isfaction on the part OF Mrs. knight
with Mr. Smart's relations with the
child, visiting the child, or vice versa,
opposition on 5mart's part to Mrs.
| Knights actions in connection with
her personal contact with the child,
surprising for example Mr.. Smart
comes back and says Mrs. knight has
been visiting the child and using her
right of access to poison the child
mind against him or Mrs. Knight that
Smart has?
Mr.. T.: would not know how TO
cover that. " ..s 81 =
Mr.. K: Would you cover it by re-
serving to either complaining party
the right to appeal To the court with.
out being prejudiced by this agree.
ment?
Mr.. T.: Giving the court jurisdie.
ton over the agreement?
Mr.. K: No. IL either party is dis
satisfied with the action of the GUS
todian or dissatisfied with the use
either Is making OF the right to visit
the child would you agree the com.
planning party could then appeal to
the court without being confronted
with this agreement?
Mr.. T.: Any agreement made shall
be without prejudice to the right OF
either party for good cause shown t.
apply To the court for a guardian or
for such general relief as the court
may see fit to grant.
Mr.. X: How about Mr.. Smart's at
titnde toward the trust deed, there has
been a great deal of talk of his bring
ing suit.
Mr.. T.: We have no quarrel with
the trust deed, the beneficiary is dead.
In other words any settlement OF this
question would be presumed to terrii-
nate al litigation over property rights
and would be construed to mean ac-
ceptanee ana endorsement by Mr..
Smart OF the trust deed. You can in.
corporate in my letter that 1t will be
In full settlement OF all matters and
in conformity and ratification of the
trust deed heretofore made.
Mr.. K: Now this is all new to
me .ss
Mr.. T.: Let me tell you something:
/ left a meeting at the brewery at a
quarter Of IL and as I passed the
Stangenwald building thought 1
would go over and see Kinney and
they said they thought he was over
in his room In the Young hutel; this
is absolutely new to me.
Mr. K: OF course there is great
issue involved and my inquiry has
been directed to the personal care
and custody Of the child. admitting
that the central issue is the possession
OF the child.
Mr. ii. Well, i save given way d
great deal more than the win con-
templates so You see we are not after
the money
Mr. X. Row let me browse over
this. | will say your position Is sncl
as to arrest my attention and my IA
vorabIe consideration. If there is any
flaw in it it will be in the consideras
ton OF what the practical outcome win
be in reference to the welfare of the
child and that would like to think
over.
Mr.. T.: Let me say this is just a
proposal and the details will have to
be worked out for me as we'll as for
yourself. have given you just gen,
eraI idea of what know Mr., Smart
will do and what think will be fair.
In other words this is not intended to
cover the technical part, just a general
view.
IN his affidavit filed in the court Of
Judge William E. Whitney of the sec
ond division of the first circuit court.
Attorney w. Al. Kinney discusses at
length an interview held recently In
Honolulu between Mrs. Knight and
Smart. He says concerning it:
That a long and trying interview
took place, as deponent is informed,
in which Mrs. knight was left utterly
Frustrated, In which 1t developed that
the main use made by Mr.. Smart OF
said interview was to make q desper-
ate and prolonged attempt to plant
suspicion in the mind OF Mrs. knight
against her husband, Fred Knight, and
to bulldoze Mrs. knight into an ac-.
ceptance Of absurd and impossible con
ditions as to the control of said child
BY menacing threats that he could de-
stroy her married life and that it
would be destroyed If she did not ac-
cept his terms:
Accuses Husband.
THAT among other things, as de-
ponent is informed and believes, Mr..
Smart at said interview told Mrs.
knight. We can prove terrible things
against Mr.. Fred Knight things that
II you knew you would divorce him..