The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1900-04-05
WHY?

When the personnel of the court of
claims was announced, The Star took
occasion to point out that at least tvs
of the appointments should have gone
to business men, with the understand
ing that men of the requisite calloer
would be willing to serve. The Cham
Der of Commerce has voiced in strong
terms what The Star suggested. A
most representative meeting, attended
by more members than ordinary, OBJ
jects to the appointments on the court
of claims. The meeting desires that
some business men should be on the
court. and the contention seems to be
eminently just.
A conversation with one of the Min
listers a few days ago comes up in
point. The reason advanced was that
the business community could be called
UP to give expert evidence, whenever
it was required. This is certainly
very extraordinary attitude. The law
yers were to be paid at certain rate
a day, and the business men could be
called upon to give up their time, for
no remuneration, to supplement the
legal rulings.
A letter which appeared yesterday in
these columns shows the legal aspect
of the case. 1t showed temper on be-
half of the profession, and suggested
court of claims composed entirely of
business men, with sneer that they
would make a mess of it. But why
should lawyers claim omniscience?
How many of the gentlemen on the
Court" have any knowledge of mer-
camille values beyond the most per-
functory, and it cannot be said that any
single member is a very leading lawyer,
though all may be and no doubt are
bright and brilliant.
That the mercantile community
should kick is no wonder. Whatever
the value of expert" testimony may
be-and the more one sees of trials, the
less one believes in it's value-what the
business community wanted was a re-
presentation upon the Board itself,
where the voice would have been of
some avail, backed by argument But
IT. expert testimony only a certain line
of question and answers is developed,
and brilliant lawyer, by adroit ques.
tioning, may make a person say, as
Swift's Huhnyhams worded it, the
thing that is not" That is an expert
witness may be so badgered according
to legal ethics that he is made to APP
pear to say what he does not mean to
say. OF course there is great skill in
this, but the morality is more than
doubtful.
What was wanted, what is wanted, is
a thoroughly competent court of
claims. Undoubtedly there will I've
claims which will have to be rejected.
But are the lawyers more fitted to
weigh the value of the claim, than a
business man whose whole time is
taken up in figuring upon values, and
methods of increasing profits.
The necessity of able legal talent on
the court of claims is self-evident, but
so also is the necessity of able mer-
camille talent. What would be the out
cry from the bar if only business men
had been appointed on the court of
claims, and the bar had only been call
ed upon to give expert testimony upon
the cases coming up The bar would
have arisen as one man, and denounced
what 1t considered as a slur upon it's
honor and it's integrity, and would
straightway have decided to watch the
iniquities of mercantile side.
To The Star the action of the mer-
chants in the Chamber of Commerce is
both patriotic and timely. Not to have
spoken out on SO vital a question is
fatal This time the merchants have
decided to take time by the forelock.