Show mm NEWTON w CASE is PARTIALLY ARGUED ACCUSERS NOT UNIT The rhe SInai Inal I hearing hai of lh the Hie examining committee 1 of 15 the tue m i un th the grievance anc committee Of ot the it Bar as association In t the case o of William Wt raa sj h held IJ this I tn nt In th the supreme r Hlf m courtroom After th the t testimony or nf several sev ses- eral additional r 1 I cr witnesses b ben been lizard ni Attorney I who I Ii representing Newton ton H brief f Mai 1 and al nl i in III th Ih tat mitt Th The members membra r of or th the thc iree t I tee r. r of or Ih the Bar association I In n run run- n- n th the application linn t hn n made their thir ar argument to 10 lh the thc examining hoard At Attorneys t st- 11 k Hn and anil W. W v. v 17 I. argued d a n In on nu th the Jl ll r f tilt the examining xa boril that Newton he granted the Il lege or of practicing n III saw v. Attorney 1 K A. A Walton the third member r of th tho th grievance ance arice II tN MM I h Jin lis wa RII not In his hili own mind l that X Newton ton should he be barred I from Iruni tc In this city It hut hul nt nn Inclined In th that t. t If tr II Ic should ho be cell censured urN or not given alven 11 the on at nt this time l adjourning the committee HI d de decided It- It to grant to Attorney Attorn Hanson an R opportunity of or being heard lican In full rull some pome evening c next week Pt c-Pt k Sergeant Pitt who ho wm l 11 In th tho n er tt t X New XI I Ian n n H 1 having III m made de dro derogatory to 10 the American party part emphatically dented denied this morning that h he lit had 1 saul said the accredited ac al'- credited to bIns h by liy that PU publication |