Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1915-01-25

In the afternoon Of the previous day
Mr. r. E. Thompson had called at my
office and inquired If had any con-
nection with the Smart case, that /
had answered in the negative, and
that Mr. Thompson had asked wheth-
er | was at liberty to Serve as guar
dian ad Item fer the miner, il appoint
ed, that had said that was, that L
had inquired Of Mr.. Thompson wheth-
er the report in the newspapers that
the child was left nothing by the will
was correct and upon his replying in
the affirmative had further inquired
OF him whether he appreciated that
my acceptance OF the appointment as
guardian ad Item would at once place
me in Scsition Of utter hostility to
him and his firm and to the father OF
the miner, and that Mr. Thompson
had answered. We appreciate that. 4
Judge Frear said that if any outside
attorney or outsider or ANYBODY
from the outside q do not recall the
precise form CT his expressionI was to
be guardian ad litem they Il think that
the word he used was web would
rather have me appointed to the Of
nee than any one else and that all
thought highly of me- The fact of the
tendency Of the three proceedings in
this general litigation, one the suit
On Hawaii for guardianship of the
person of the miner, one brought
oy the miner for administration
CT his mothers estate and the
above entitled cause was re-
ferred to. He said that they Che was
NOT speaking of himself alone but
whether he used the word I'VE or
mentioned by name his firm and that
Of Holmes. Stanley & Olson and Mi,
w A, Kinney, cannot now say with
certainty at the time understood
him to refer to, these two firms and
Mr.. Kinney, but that understanding
may possibly at that moment have
been based upon what / had read in
the newspapers) had already done at
Mrs. Knights request great deal of
work In the matter: that they and
Mrs. knight had done it all for the
chfld's benefit (meaning the minor
herein); that they wanted to see the
child's interests properly protected in
the probate case (meaning the above
entitled cause) and that he or they-I
u do not recall which, wondered"
or wanted to know II do not recall
the exact form in which the question
was introduced but In substance it was
an inquiry or giving to me of an
opportunity to state) whether Ear
Engagements" could be made for the
association" of ourselves" Ito the
best of my recollection ourselves"
was the word he used, but it may
have been some other word of phrase
indicative of the attorneys whom he
had been referring tol with me as
guardian aid Item for the protection of
the child's interests. ] replied that
deemed it to be inconsistent with my |
duty towards the child and with my
duty towards the court that appoint |
ed me to at that time enter into any
agreement or make any promise or |
statement as to whether / would en-
ploy or associate with me in the case
any other attorney or attorneys or as
to whether would employ or asso-
ciate with me his firm or Mr.. olson's |
firm or Mr.. Kinney or all of them;
that my feelings towards his firm and |
its members and towards Mr.. Olson's
firm and its members were of the
most cordial nature but that could |
not then say, consistently with my |
duty as understood it, whether /
would employ or associate with me
any one or more or all of them or Mr..
Kinney; that I might do so and that
/ might not do so; that had had no
time to give the matter any considera-
ton and had not concluded in my
own mind whethera1 would employ any
attorneys to aid me or. If I did. whom
| would employ. Judge Frear said
that we were depressing" Eut l re-
piled that, as / had understood him,
that was exactly what he wanted to
know. also said that If he, Judge
Frear, or his associates felt that for
any reason my appointment as guar
dian ad Item should be revoked,
i'you" (meaning Judge Frear or his
associates) could make application to
that effect before Judge Whitney the
following morning or at. any other
time and that would not feel badly
about it If they DID. )
Too Many Guardians: - ~
Judge Frear also mentioned the
point that a guardian ad litem should
not be appointed. upon the nomination
of the adverse party; and the POSSIBLE
ity Of q consolidation of the two pro-
ceedings (for administration and for
prohate) for trial and of there being
too many guardians ad litem was dis
cussed to some extent. 4
AT some time during the conversa-
ton. but after he had inquired whe-