El Nuevo mexicano., 1916-06-01

the disbarment proceedings will like
The prominence Of the attorneys
whose conduct is questioned, the wide
publicity given the charges against
them, and the usual character Of the
procedure, was sufficient to arouse
much interest in the hearing which
opened at $3.50 o'clock this morning.
Judge Pope held the hearing in one
of the rooms on the first floor of the
Federal building, and it was crowded
with attorneys, witnesses, newspaper
men and others interested in the case.
Judge Edward r. Wright announc.
ed that Attorney A. b. Renenan was
associated with him In defending the
attorneys. Summers Burkhart and
Francis G.. Wilson took turns in repre-
senting the government.
Charges Considered Serlatim
The charges were taken UP seria-
tim, Mr.. Burkhart reading the accuse
tion. Summed up this charges Marion
e Wood first, with serving as attor-
neys for Mrs. Pietra G. Garcia, and OBJ
tanning from her information which
they used to obtain employment from
a client in Salt Lake City who brought
suit as a claimant to the estate left
Mrs. Garcia.
Second, that they acted improperly
by soliciting employment through in
sorting an advertisement in a Salt
Lake City paper and thus stirred up
litigation.
Third, that Mr.. Marion tried to get
an evening newspaper in Albuquerque
to represent an opinion of the federal
court / n such a manner as to give the
Impression that Messrs. Marion and
Wood had been completely exonerated
Four, that false and fabricated let
ters were prepared in Marion and
Woods Office to mis-lead the court in
the Garcia inheritance case.
In discussing the first charge of adj
verse employment, Mr.. Burkhart, the
u. S. district attorney, declared to the
court that the charge had been admit
ted in the answer of the respondents.
He said that there was an admission
that the information they obtained
from Mrs. Petra G.. Garcia enabled
them to secure adverse employment
and, second, it was admitted they adj
vertised in a Salt Lake paper. Mr..
Burkhart added that he made these
statements as a demurrer to the an
swer of the attorneys, asking they be
found guilty on this charge. or rather
on these two charges.
Denies Admission Of Guilt
Judge Wrighht arose and declared
there was no admission of guilt in the
answe He said that it was not ad-
mitted that Juan A. Garcia ever was
the agent of his mother except when
he first went into the office of Mar
ron & Wood. Mrs. Garcia denied
that she ever employed Mr.. Marion or
Mr.. Wood" he continued, "and she de-
MED the agency, and so did j. A. Gar
cia. Nothing is here to show that they
gained information from her or from
him."
Mr.. Renehan followed Judge Wright
and outlined the question, as he say
it. at issue, and said the question on
the score of the first two charges is
whether or not the respondents were
guilty of moral obliquity.
whether j. A. Garcia was an agent
for his mother is immaterial," replied
Mr.. Burkhart. "He went to the Office
VI MdIIOu " WOOu anu q l6b Was Jdlh-
ed over. These defendants believed
J.. A. Garcia to be the agent of g1is
mother. Whether he was or not makes
no difference as to their culpability.
They obtained information and used
it later to get employment. The ques-
tion is whether the defendants were
unfaithful to the trust imposed In
them"
Mr.. Wilson followed Mr.. Burkhart. de-
claring that it makes no difference
what came up afterward. He said the
fact is Marion & Wood were employed
and it is also proved they stirred up
litigation by advertising. He said the
moral question is what was the inn
preston of Messrs. Marion and Wood
as to their employment. He conclud-
ed saying, They have admitted they
did the two things with which they are
here charged"
Judge Wright, in reply, quoted a de-
cision of the Ninth circuit court, point
ing out that the test of inconsistency
in such cases is not whether the law
yer was formerly employed but wheth
er in accepting a new retainer he does
injury to his former client.
What did Messrs. Marion and
Wood learn by their conversation with
J.. A. Garcia?" he asked. Merely the
existence of a claimant but not a sin
Gle fact or circumstance. And it turn
ed out to be that the party referred to
by J. A. Garcia was not the Bessie
at all"
Bessie Speight, 1t appeared in the
trial, was a women in Salt
Lake who claimed to have been the
wife Of Elias Garcia by a common law
marriage and her little girl, Lillian,
was claimant of a share in the Garcia
{
Judge Wright declared that this case
before Judge Pope is different
from a civil cause or a criminal case; {
It is one that involves the standing of
Two men as lawyers. I
Judge Pope decided to pass over the I
first two charges until the afternoon {
ior further consideration.