The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1886-07-14
II II e
Pacific Commercial Advertiser
WEDNESDAY july
THE LEGISLATURE.

The Legislative Assembly had field
day yesterday about small questions, in
volving little or no principle. The most
closely contested measure was a bill to
create the Office of official stenographic
reporter for the Supreme Court, and to
make provision for his salary. There
can be no question whatever as to the
value of an official shorthand report of
legal proceedings, but the majority OF
the Legislature did not appear to think
that this was the proper time to make
such an appointment Undoubtedly
the subject was new to them, and they
were unable to make up their minds
upon SO important an innovation at
short notice. The debate, however,
should certainly go long way towards
informing them and enabling them to
realize the advantage of the practice re-
commended and in operation elsewhere
Mr.. Aholo recognized this when he said
that perhaps in two years from now they
would be sufficiently advanced to per-
ceive the necessity for such an appoint
ment, and although the Attorney Gen
eral made a gallant fight for the bill,
which had been introduced by his pre-
decessor, it was indefinitely postponed.
The argument in favor of the bill,
however, disclosed a somewhat extra
mainly from Messrs. Castle and Dole, who
have had long experience in our Courts,
we may assume that their statement is
true. A more serious reflection upon
the administration of law and justice in
the Supreme Court could not well
be pronounced that the remarks in
favor of the appointment of an
official Court reporter that fell from
the lips of these gentlemen. The argu-
ment embodied statement to the effect
that the Judges made the record suit
their own views, and that therefore an
appeal from the ruling of a trial Judge
to the full Court was a farce. Some
times the Judge took a note of the evil
dence and sometimes he did not and
when the conflicting notes OF counsel
were submitted to him he altered thesel
to suit himself, and then it was usually
wrong. This, in brief, is the allegation
of legal gentlemen who certainly will
not be accused of entertaining feelings OF
hostility to the Supreme Judges.
Furthermore, it was stated that
charges to juries, always orally deliv-
cred, are sometimes so involved that it
is impossible for any man in common
writing to follow them. and if an appeal
be taken against an instruction by the
Judge, the full Court sends it back be-
cause it did not set out what the Judge
had said, and which he declined to fur
nish. OF course, in such cases the
notes of an official reporter would be
conclusive; but seeing shat no such
Court officer exists it should be the
duty of the Judges to take every pre-
caution, by close notes of evidence and
written charges, to facilitate business
and ensure that justice be done As
Stunning the correctness OF the statements
of the legal gentlemen advocating this
appointment, one is reluctantly forced to
conclude that the remissness OF the judi
ciary in these respects has become grave
abuse which should somehow be RENE
died. 1t is not our charge, however; ii
was made in the Legislative Assembly
in debate, and therefore challenges con
sideration.
This debate should be productive OF
good, although it failed in its direct OBJ
ject. The Supreme Bench is now upon
trial at the bar of public opinion, and it
can only hope to preserve its influence
and the respect due to it, by such
course of action hereafter as viii create
confidence in the minds not merely OF
the bar, but of litigants also. For cen
turtles the English Courts were without
official reporters, as Colonial Courts are
generally to-day, but we never read Of
a similar complaint from the bar in any
OF these places. 1t is true the news
papers report all Court proceedings mi
nutely, and in special cases lawyers en-
ploy private shorthand reporters, whose
attested notes are received as evidence;
but the main dependence is in the
Judges notes, which are usually full and