Show ROGERS ON THE STAND GiVes His Version of the Famous Fa-mous Contract EVANS DENIES GRUNTING Almost tho Entire Time of Judge Twomey In the Disbarment Case Against David Evans and Lindsay i R Rogers Yesterday Was Taken Up With the Examination of Bog crs Attorney Says Nelson Violated I Contract Had Wanted to Try Case 4 on Merits but Williams Objected 1 The Id king of testimony before JudgeD Judge-D H Twomcy master In chancery nth n-th disbarment proceedings against 7 Lindsay Rogers and David Tlvans was resumed yesterday morning at 1030 oclock Parley L Williams the complainant com-plainant in the case did not appear and there were no spectators in the courtroom Mr Rogers was first sworn and when Ills evidence was completed Mr Evans who had testified the day brforc was recalled The examination of the two attorneys was concluded at 12 oclock and there being no other ttJlneases present an adjournment was taken until Monday at 2 oclock AtE At-E torney W A Lee for the prosecution Insisted on continuance until Wednesday Wednes-day In order to secure the attendance oC Itnesses from Nevada but Judge romcy would not grant the request unless the time for his report to bo handed to the Supreme court should z be extended Mr Lee had attempted P to secure this extension but Justice Miner the only member of the court s In the city would not act on the matter alone so that a further continuance depends upon the return of at least one of the other members the court I and the disposition oC Mr Lees motion mo-tion when presented to at least two of t the Justices MR ROGERS TESTIFIES On the direct examination which was conducted by Judge Powers Mr Rogers Rog-ers stated that he drew the contract bftwcen Evans Rogers and Thomas Nelson on which the disbarment proceedings pro-ceedings hal been brought Prior to I this a similar contract had been executed exe-cuted between his firm and Alfred Nelson Nel-son an attorney who was a brother of Thomas Nelson But Alfred Nelson I had become financially Involved before 0 tin trial of the damage suit against i I the Southern Pacific company I which was the subject matter of the contract and had left the country Thomas Nelson Nel-son then wanted to be recognized as t the successor of his brother the contract 1 con-tract saying that Alfred would be the bpneflclary of what he Thomas should realize which would be onethird I oneKiy I of the amount obtained In the I suit 1th some reluctance on the part of Mr Rogers he had finally acceded t to Thomas Nelsons request as he rep rented that he could render special pprvlce In Inducing witnesses to come from Nevada and California He considered con-sidered that the duties of Thomas Nelson Nel-son as defined In the contract were proper and had no Intention of suborning sub-orning perjury or doing anything I against public policy VIOLATED AGREEMENT The case was tried five or six times but l Thomas Nelson failed to comply with the terms of the contract and would not advance any money to witnesses wit-nesses For this failure Nelson had l pleaded poverty saying that Clove I lands administration had ruined the sheep business and he could get no I money But witness claimed that after the ease had been twice nonsuited N leon lost confidence Jn Its merits which was the cause of his failure to render the promised assistance Evans Rogers had proceeded with the case and furnished their client who was the widow of Charles Nelson with several j sev-eral hundred dollars having given her 300 at one time After the case had been won Thomas Nelson then made p demands for his share of Judgment according to the contract but witness informed Nelson that he had failed to perform any part of the contract and refused payment I did not consider said Mr Rogers that I was legally morally or ethically bound to pay Nel Bon A dollar and I did not do so HAD TRIED MANY GASES Mr Rogers stated that with Mr Evans he had tried over 100 damage cases In which the complainant Mr Williams represented the defendants 1 and in these suits they had collected from 12000 to 150000 He had borne 110 illfeeling on account of this litigation litiga-tion against MI Williams who claimed to be holler than other attorneys or the coUrts Witness and Mr Williams had always been friendly but Mr Evans and Mr Williams had been at outH Witness had always tried to S practice according to the ethics of the profession When the action on the contract was begun Attorney A O Horn had been employed by Evans Rogers Mr Horn demurred to tho complaint and raised the question of champerty Witness was not aware of the contents of the demurrer and while I he knew It had been filed he supposed it was a time server for the purpose of delay but when the demurrer was sustained and he learned of its nature Mr Rogers had offered a stipulation In writing to Mr Williams to try the case on its merits but Mr Williams rushed the appeal with the Intention In-tention of giving the case an airing THOUGHT WILLTAMS UNFAIR r On crossexamination Mr Rogers stated that he did not think Mr Williams Wil-liams had treated him fairly In another an-other case Williams had gone to Boise l and procured a settlement with one of their clients a lady who was sick l mid to accomplish the settlement he f1 had secured the aid of a priest who I the railroad This c wUJ given a pass on waD done without notice to Evans t cz QnOgelfJ The lady afterward repudi j atcd the settlement and the usual verdict i ver-dict against Mr Williams and his clientS client-S had been obtained AH to Mr Wll Li llutnss statement the day before that j Mr Evans had said that ho always had and always would practice in accordance i ac-cordance with the terms of the contract Jn the Croco case witness claimed that t fJ Evans paid that he always had stood and would k for the widows and orphans continue to do so In the Croco case the usual Evans Rogers had obtained verdict and had got a nice fee EVANS DENIED GRUNTING Mr Evans took the stand to refute i1 the statement matte the day before by Mr Williams that witness had responded re-sponded with a grunt to the salutation further How are you Dave He I said Williams nan drawn upon his fertile imagination and I protest against being classed with that species sole vocabulary Is a grunt For > hose I ji years they had been friendly and I Dave and Parley were the usual greetings Witness had never stated I r4 that contracts Hin Mar to tin one I the Croco cane bud been habituallY made by him He too had been willing c to withdraw the judgment on the d v murrer In the Nelson suit and to try the case on Its merits His feelings i toward Mr Williams had naturally been disturbed by the disbarment proceedings I pro-ceedings but he had always spoken to him At this time adjournment waS L taken until 1030 tomorrow t morning |