Polynesian., 1858-05-01
OI)e })oIDslcslon;
Published weekly at Honolulu, Oahu. H. [.
CHARLES GORDON HOPKINS, EDITOR.
SUPREME COURT.---In Bauco,

SUPREME COT BancO,
John H. Wood as. j. NJ Ederton and J. W. E. Mai
& kai Garnishee.
E JU,TIcE ROBERTSON delivered the Judgment of the
Court as follows:
This case before the Court on exceptions to the
decision Of the Police Justice of Honolulu who while
rendering judgment against the principal defendant
for the amount of plaintiffs claim, discharged the
garnishee.
1t appears from the statement of facts in the case
that At the time process issued from the Police
Court, the defendant was captain OF Artillery in
His Majesys service, and the glrnshee was Paymas
Ter Of the troops Process served upon the latter
under the Act of 1885, with the view of attaching in
his hands, the monthly pay of the defendant to meet
the plaintiff claim, and the principal point now rails
ed ty coanse for the garuishee is, that in his official ca
pacity Paymaster General, he be held liable
as The trustee of the defendant, nor can the money
passing through his hands, as disbursing agent of
the government be attached by process of garnishee
That lr Maika could not be considered as the trus-
zee Of the defendant in respect of his pay as a militia
~ officer, coming through the hands Of the former
Paymaster of the Kings troops, is in opinion
quite clear, and think the argument Of Mr.. Mai
Sas counsel is well sustained by authority. (See
Cushing Treatise the Trustee Process D. 49, Kent
Commentaries, Vol. 2 p. 46S, note c.; Wendell u.s.
PIERCE l3 n H. 502, cited in U. ). Digest, Vol 7, p
l67 sec. Z; Opinions U. S. Attorney Generals Vol l.
p. 60i
No pr witty of contract existeI between the defend
n.
Hattie as the 'agent factor trustee of the former,
in respect of his pay officer. The funds entruS-
ed the latter disbursng agent OF the !iOyern-
nent 50 long rs they remain in his hands in his off
4l capacity the funds of the Government and
Of the udi' iluals among whom they um ltely to
be distributed Tae Paymaster is not their debtor.
Ia the case Of Chealy at U.s. Brewer and Tru ,tee
lin the Supreme Court of Massachusetts, in which a
county treasurer summoned the trustee of the
principal defendant and disclosed that he lad in his
has as such treasurer the time Of the service OF
the writ sam of money which was due t) the defend
ant fog ais services jur1r which he by
law obliged 10 pay the defendant the Court decided
that ~ cDad be charged trustee of the defendant
Justice Selg ck, after explaining the Union Of the
Ccurc sll "The consequence Of this opinion S, that
plbiic oil who has money IN BIS hands to satisfy
la de,nii which ole has upon ai, merely public
officer cannot for that be adjuiged s trustee.
See Mas. Rep Vol Z, p. 260)
caSe still directly la point than the above
has been decided in the SIpre:ne Court of the Unite
States That OF SIX eases depending upon the
same principle, brought before that CoIft by wrlS OF
error frosn one of the State Courts of Virginia Six
wr,s OF tach neut had been issued by Justice OF the
Peace at The suit of boai hing 1use keepers against
certain Seamen of the frigie CJgStt lon The SrIts
we're lad Oh moneys in The hlnls of tie pur~er, due
10 the seanpn for wages. The money afterwards
pll to the b. the furSer. in disregard OF the
al achiuents by order of the Secr@tlTy OF the Navy
justice M,Leau IN delivering the ju 'gmcn; of the
Cou.t said - The important question Is, whether the
money IN the hands of the Purser, though due 10 the
seanen Gr wages, was attachable. Purser 1t would
SEEM cannot in this ect be distinguished from any
other disbursing agent of the Government. Ii the
creditors Of these scamen may by process of attach
mea divert the public money from It's Legitimate and
appropriate object, the thing may be done rs re
gals the pay of our officers and of the army and
nary; anl also ia every other case where the pu0llc
funds may be placed In the hands of agent fer dis
ba-sement To state such principle is to retae It.
No govcrnment can sanction 1t. At ali times 1t woui
be und embarrassing, and under some CIR 'umstanceS
mig, be fatal TO the public service" iBuch man 'S
Alexander, Curtis Dec. Sup. Court, u s., Vol 10, P.
l9).
We all of the opinion that the supposed trustee
the present case was rightly discharged by the Court
below
Judgment affirmed.
Nj. Hinton, for the Plaintiff
Mr. Bates, for the Trustee.
b A newly married couple took up their resi-
] dence In Poplar street. At breakfast next morn
Ing, the gentleman said to the lady