The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-11-28

4 The writ of mandamus served upon
Deputy Auditor Meyers and High
Sheriff Brown by Gears bailiff, Ellis. is
a most peculiar document The writ is
endorsed on the return as being the orig.
inal. which Judge Gear held was re-
quired to be served by showing to the
parties affected
| The writ itself however does not hear
out the endorsement as to it being an
original. The document is much mark
ed and scratched. 1t is not only not
the original writ signed by Judge Gear
but is hardly a true copy and the SER
vice will quite likely be invalidated a
second time.
1t will be remembered that H. C. Aus
tin asked for writ of mandamus di-
recting E. P. Dole as Attorney General,
A. M. Brown as High Sheriff, and H. C..
Meyers as Deputy Auditor, to restore
him to his Office as auditor of the Ter
ritory. This application was demurred
to and Judge Gear overruled the same.
On the goth of November a peremptory
writ was issued to the respondents
which was served by one of Austin's at
torneys, Mr.. c. W. Ashford. This not
being obeyed the respondents were cit
ed and charged with coDtay,pt of oo,,r+.
the service of the writ not being legally
made, the contempt proceedings fell
through, but Judge Gear still held to
the carrying out of his mandate, not
withstanding an appeal has been taken
to the Supreme Court and notice of the
same given to petitioner.
The files now show what appears to
be deliberate tampering with the pa
pers in the case. There are now two
original writs, at least the first one is
not in sight, and the one returned Nov
26th, after service by Bailiff Ellis,
shows it to be a carbon copy which
was first served as a true copy of the
prior original writ upon H. G. Meyers;
this was annexed to Mr.. Meyers return
to the contempt charge and is marked
as Exhibit A. it also has Mr.. Cath
carts pencil memorandum t22 Wis
S7s,'' evidently referring to a case upon
the subject of legal service of such |
writs. 1t also has the following notes |
in Cathcart's handwriting: Handed to |
Meyers 1905 p. m, Nov. 20, 1902, by |
no original shown to him and |
no demand made on him by Austin; de-
nand made by Robertson In an effort
20 make it original, the copy is signed
oy Geo. D. Gear" upon the face of
he writ, his copied name struck off,
Ind the certificate of one of the court
'fficers, Henry Smith, is scratched off;
clerk j. A. Thompson also signs the
writ, whereas previously his name was
and he also attaches the :
zeal of court. To make it worse than
.haos, as the Supreme Court will now !
De asked to pass upon the case, this
opy now purporting to be the original,
s dated the goth of November, whereas
m that date the document was a mere
opy of the original which is not now
With the files or if still with the files
here are then two originals which will
ave to be passed upon by the appellate ;
curt. The first original was mounted
With two dollars in revenue stamps
whereas the second original is not so
mounted, and is therefore insufficient
n law to be used as evidence AS a
natter of fact this second original,
hough having the date of the first writ,
vas not issued until the 26th of Novem-
Ter, served the same day and returned
he same day by Bailiff Ellis. who
tyles the carbon copy as an original"
which makes two originals, although
here can be but one according to law.