The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1899-06-29
IN RE HENRY I. COOPER
BRIEF FOR RESPONDENT FILBT
TODAY.
Not Only Asks That the Rule be Dis
charged But That the Conduct of Re-
lator be Condemned.

Attorney w. o. Smith this afternoon
filed a brief in the matter of Henry E.
Cooper, an attorney at law, in the su-
preme court. 1t sets out succinctly the
argument and authorities in his clients
behalf, and not only asks for the dis
charge of the rule against the attorney
general, but that the conduct of the re-
lator in the proceedings be condemned
by the court.
Briefs on the other side will be filed
tomorrow. There will be two, one writ
ten by Mr.. McClanahan on behalf of the
firm of Kinney. Ballou & McClanahan
and a personal brief written by w. A.
Kinney.
W. o. Smiths brief in behalf of the
respondent is as follows
Respondent respectfully submits that
no ground has been shown to justify
the laying of the information or to war
rant the court in taking any action
against the respondent.
The action complained of was that
taken by the respondent as attorney
general in his official capacity, and as a
ministerial act in the matter of a pros
ecution pending in the district court of
Honolulu against one Carreira charged
with assault and battery.
If any error were committed at all it
was simply that of an error of judg-
ment of the respondent in the exercise
of his duties as attorney general and
! it is submitted that the action taken by
him in that case was proper and justi-
| fable under the statute.
! Filing an information against an at
| torney charging gross and scandalous
misconduct and malpractice, should on
| ly be. done in an extreme case and
where the conduct fully justifies the
charge, and the offense must be such as
shows him unfit to be entrusted with
the powers of the profession.
| l Amer. & Eng. Encyc. of Law, p.
946; Baker V. Com. 10 Bush (Ky.), 592;
in re Blake, 80 L. ]. %. b., 80; u. S. v.
| Porter, 2 Cranch, 60; Austin's Case, 5
Rawle (Pa.), 191.
Practitioners in the courts of record
are "summarily amenable to the courts
of record, and may be fined, imprison-
ed or dismissed from the roll of practi-
| TONERS for satisfactory cause, upon the
complaint of any party aggrieved by
their malprs.ctice or for non-payment
of moneys collected by them for pri-
vate parties, or for any deceit or other
gross misconduct" Civil laws, Section
| 1893.
District ma gistrates may be remov-
ed from office for cause by the supreme
court or by the circuit Judge of the
judicial circuit in which the district of
the magistrate complained of is situat-
| ed Civil laws, Section 111S.-As& go l..s.
THE President and all civil officers of
the Republic shall be liable to removal
| from office on Impeachment by the
| House of Representatives upon any of
| the following grounds, namely:
| ANY act or negligence involving
moral turpitude, punishable by law as
an offense, and committed while in Of
! flee, incapacity for the due performance
of official duties, mall administration II,
office, and assessment of office holders
for PARTISAN or political expenses.
Article 80, Constitution.
| Should there be abuse by the attorney
general of the exercise of his functions
'the remedy is not by an application tC
this court to interfere by the exercise
of it's undoubted power and prerogative
but to hold him responsible before the
| high court of parliament"
Regina V. Allen, 0 Cox c. c., 1872.
The institution of proceedings by one
attorney from improper motives anC
without just grounds to disbar another
is misconduct.
In re Kelley, 62 N. Y, 1893.
The malice of the relator in this cas-,
must be evident to the court from tht
pleadings, the evidence and the circum
stances. 1t is submitted that 1t is du,
the respondent that not only should tn,
rule be discharged, but that the con
duct of the relator in the premises
should be condemned by the court. Res
pectfully submitted.
WILLIAM O. SMITH,
Attorney for respondent
Honolulu, June 26, 1899.