The Maui news. [volume] (Wailuku, Maui, H.I.) 1900-current, 1922-08-11
Bevins Hearing
Proceeds Slowly
Continued from page one)

Waiwaiole and others; the fifth with
the alleged presentation Of claims to
the county of Maui in c~ontravention
of section 1884, r. L. 1915, and the
sixth charge with the case of the ter
ritory VS.. Charles E. Thompson.
Wednesday session was begun by a
review of the third charge in the case,
dealing with the Manuel Boteilho-
Thomas Brown land controversy.
Deputy Attorney General Joseph Light
foot read at length from records of
the case provided by Manuel Asue,
clerk of the second circuit court at
Waikiki, reciting that Boteilho, an
aged Portuguese now dead, had puT-
chased from Thomas Brown in August
1917, a parcel of land consisting of
approximately 100 acres and had later
found that he had not purchased any
thing, charging that the deeds which
were delivered to him referred to no
land owned by Brown or any of his
associates. The price paid was $3.50.
Boteilho. in an effort to recover,
went to Attorney Bevins and asked
that a criminal suit be instituted
against Brown. Bevins, according to
the record read by Lightfoot, failed,
refused and neglected" to institute
suit against Brown, and in September
of 1917 brought a civil suit, instead.
It was alleged that Bevins accepted,
previously, a fee of 800 from Boteilho
It also was alleged in the history of
the case. that Bevins, by virtue of his
being county attorney, vas not legally
permitted to represent BoteilhO, as
a county attorney is barred from APP
pearing in civil matters where there
is a cause for criminal action.
Murphy Takes Stand
Eugene Murphy, an attorney of Maui
who was identified with the case, was
called as a witness and told of his
rendering an opinion to Boteilho OF
: the matter after he had made a trip
to Honolulu and had checked up the
land records.
Cross-examined by Attorney Arthur
G. Smith, representing Bevins, Muir.
ply admitted that he did not know
exactly where the land in question
was located, as he had never been on
the spot. He said that he had given
his opinion to Boteilho, advising that
= suit be brought against Brown and his
associates, after he had checked over
all the facts and had determined to
the best of his ability, without an &C
ludl ' ioll ~ NIlC BloCCs "iSlO lS b"l
eel OF ground in question was located
At the conclusion of Murphy's testi
mony, j.. NJ. Ambrose, a figure in the
? so-called Ambrose-K ealakaa case and
the first item to be heard on the list
of charges against Bevins, was called
: Ambrose recited in detail how he had
come from his home at Lahaina
! Maui, to Waikiki, on the morning
when his case was set for trial. He
. testified hat he had ridden to Wal
luku in the same car with Kealakaa
; and others interested in the case, but
had had no conversation with Keala
, kaa either during the ride or after
p, the party had reached Waikiki ant
= had gathered in front of Attorney
=. Murphy's office and later still inside
the office.
When the matter came up for hear
ing in court that day, Ambrose said
Bevins was present and read thu
charges. Bevins is declared by Am
brose to have then said:
This case puts me in a very EN-
barrassing position, as l have beef
representing the defendant"
) Bevins then asked for a nolle pross'
which was granted.
After the motion to set aside thu
stipulation had been made, Ambrose
D said, he held a conversation with Bev
u ms in which he (Ambrose) had re
I marked that Kealakaa had COMMITTEES
! perjury in his testimony.
According to Ambrose, Bevins thei
replied:
THAT'S where l get your goat. d.
D you think | am damned fool enough
to go and prosecute my W client?
On cross-eXamination by Attorne,
Smith it developed that the Ambrose
y Kealakaa controversy dealt with tn
l location of a fence which Ambros'
Z had erected on what he said was hi
property and which Kealakaa had tori
D down. not less than three times il
!, three years, claiming that the fenc'
encroached on the boundaries OF hi
. own land.
. The alleged incident above recite'
{ occurred after Ambrose had obtaine'
= a warrant for the arrest of Kealaka'
from the district magistrate at Lana
. ma and when the matter came up 10
hearing.
. The remainder of the morning
u session was taken up by Smith an
Ambrose, the former asking if it wer
= not true that Bevins had made sue
b and such a statement at the court
house on the morning of the hearin
of the case, and with Ambrose deny
ing almost without exception what
was claimed Bevins had said.
The session was adjourned at moo
until 8 a. m. Thursday.
Seven witnesses appeared Thurs
day morning in the following order
F. p. Rosecrans, foreman of the gran
jury which investigated the An
brose-Kealakaa case; Deputy Attorne
General Joseph Lightfoot; Sheri
Of Clement Crowell, John H. Waiwaiol'
- former deputy under Crowell; NJ.
Deponte, who acted as interpreter fo
= Boteilho; Manuel S. Pacheco, distriC
magistrate for Makawao who acted a
Interpreter at the Boteilho- Brown trif
and p. n. Mcmahon, court reporter g
the same action.
Tilt on Witness Stand
Rosecrans was questioned by Deput
Il --I G-lEE>A