Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1916-07-23
DiSbarment Proceedings
Against Well Known AIbu-
QuerQue Lawyers Concluded
With Arguments of Attorneys
JUDGES HOLD SESSION
TO CONTINUE FINDING
Testimony Of Thomas N, VIII
kerSOO Contradicted on Last
Day of Hea1ingi Garcia Rec
ord Submitted in Evidence,

The, trial Of the dSharment pro.
ceedinEs instituted against owen y
Marion and Francis T.. Wood, which
has beer in progress IOr the last three
days, came to an end late yesterday
afternoon with the concluding argu-
ment for the prosecution by Attorney
General lranl, w Clancy and the
case is now in the hands OF the su-
preme court for decision as to the
guilt or innocence of the two dttor-
news on the charges filed against
them and also as to the punishment
that shall be visited upon them in the
event they are found to be guilty,
It is believed that the decision in
The case will be forthcoming with the
minimum OF delay, as there was COM
paratvely little conflict in the evil
dence introduced as To the physical
facts Of what Is alleged to have trans
pired, tie main contentious being as
TO the legal effect OF those facts and
the construction TO ne placed on the
acts of the two attorneys. Motives
play a large part in the determination
of the case, and it will be for the three
Judges who sat at the trial to decide
from the evidence what motives act
uated Mr.. Marion and Mr.. Wood in
-
Before leaving for their homes last
night the members of the court held
an informal conference AT which it is
believed that a general understanding
was reached as to what decision would
he made on certain of the accusations
which were heard at the trial. What
the result of this conference was could
not be learned, as each member of the
court was silent as to what took place.
on certain points involving disputed
issues of fact there will be no attempt
to arrive at conclusion until the eva
dence has been transcribed BY the
stcnographer and the judges have had
an opportunity carefully to consider
the record as made up.
WilkCrsOn COntradictcd.
The feature of the morning session
Yesterday was the flat contradiction
bv Mr.. Marion of certain sensational
statements made Friday afternoon by
Thomas N. Wilkerson and the reading
Of depOsitiOns made by Mr.. Wilker-
sons former client, to whom the tes-
timGHy given the afternoon before re-
lated, also negatiVinG the testimony
Of the attorney. MT WilkersOn pre-
viOuSly had taken the stand ana teSu-
fled that he had read these depoSl-
tons but was none the less positive
of the correctness Of his assertions,
which he reiterated. The testimony
COutradiCted related to the alleged
employment Of coerclve methods by
Mr., Marion TO compel the defendant
in q divorce proceeding 10 pay the
firm of MarrOu Il Wood an eXOrbitanl
fee.
No oral evidence was introduced at
this hearing on the charges growing
out of the case of Garcia vs.. Garcia,
which recently were considered I'm dis
harment proceedings in the United
States district court in Santa Fr, eN-
cept as TO one point, but the record OF
that hearing and the opinion OF Judge
Pope finding the respondents guilty
and suspending them from practice
for two years, was submitted In eVi-
denCe
Newspaper Publication.
The one exception referred 10 was
the charge alleging that Mr.. Marion
procured the publication of a miSlead-
ing newspaper story in the Albuquer-
que Evening Herald which tended TO
create a false impression and did Gre
ate a false impression relative TO the
effect of a supplemental order issued
by Judge Pope in the Garcia case, the
story in question stating that Judge
Pope's order was a complete eNonera-
tion of the firm of Marion a Wood
from any charges Of misconduct IN
the original case.
As on the hearing before Judge Pope
in Santa Fe, the witnesses on this
point were r. B. Hening, editor Of the
Evening Herald, and Mr.. Marion, The
evidence OF each was practically the
same as that given at the hearing IN
the federal court. Mn Hening told OF
having submitted the proof of the
story to Mr. Marion before its publ
cation and of having asked the latter
II 1t was correct. and of Mr Marion 5
having stated that it was. Mr.. Mar
TOn's evidence was to the effect that
he paid little attention to anything in
the story except the copy of Judge
Pope's opinion, and barely glanced
over the lead in which it was stat
ed that the firm of Marion x Wood
had been exonerated. The evidence OF
10th witnesses was that Mr.. Marion
did nothing to procure the publication
OF the story and that he requested, II
anything was published at all, that
The opinion should be set out in full.
Committee Not Called on.
Mr.. Renehan, of counsel for the
respondents, asked at this juncturel