The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1905-02-28

libel. He has Incorporated it in his
complaint.
MACON AND THE BAR ASsO-
CATION"
The Bar Association owes it to itself
| and to the legal profession to take note
of the characterization of J. Alfred
Magoon, made by the Supreme Court,
from the bench, in deciding case in
which he was an attorney of record and
in which his professional conduct was
an issue, and it would seem, a deter
mining factor. So strongly did his
conduct appeal to the Supreme Court
that without waiting for the conclu-
sion of the argumena, orally and sum-
marily, the court decided against Mr..
Magoon's client, because his case, be-
ing bound up with Mr.. Magoon's pro-
fessional conduct i'm it was declared to
be negotiable and to have been
brought without that necessary pre-
requisite in equity, "clean hands"
This is not the first time Mr.. Ma
goons professional conduct has been
! exscoriated by the courts. In this very
case, the Circuit Judge before whom
/ it was heard, Judge Gear, went more
/ fully into denunciation of his profess
sional conduct than the Supreme Court
did. The gist of the charge against
MagoOn is that he went into court to
] declare void for fraud, a deed the
( making of which he had himself adj
vised and against Il man whose re-
! tainer he held in the very matter out
of which the litigation grew. Mr.. Ma
| COON, i'm a communication to the Ad-
vertiser, seeks to parry the thrust by
saying that the retainer was made
quate. But so far from that being
either defense or mitigation, to any
/ mind having a clear ideal of a lawyers
duty to his client, it is aggravation of
the offense.
The charges against Magoon, as they
are forcefully and straightforwardly
stated by Judge Gear, make the Of
Tense charged in the proceedings grow
ing out of the John X. Sumner case,
pale into insignifcance. The same Of
Tense is charged in equally strong,
though not in quite so direct language
by the Supreme Court. A mere state
ment of the case, even Magoon's state
l IL,
own signature, puts it up to the Bar
Association to begin proceedings for
disbarment, or to condone breach Of
one of the fundamental principles of
legal ethics.
But the case of Dee against Smith,
is not the first case in which Magoon
has been charged from the bench with
conduct that ought to have driven him
from the bar. In the case of Christ
ley against Magoon, i'm both the Cir
cult and the Supreme Courts, he was
, exscoriated, as no man sensitive to his
professional reputation would allow
himself to be without taking every
possible means to secure vindication,
and as no man ought to be without
proceedings following which would
either result i'm his vindication or his
dsbarment
At the time that the Christley case
was tried and the decision in the SUI
preme Court was rendered, there was
r not perhaps as keen an appreciation in
the profession of it's own honor as there
is now, or at least as there ought &c
t be- 1t was a time of transition and
} uncertainty, and i'm the nature OF
z things, professional esprit du corps
. might excusably, not have been as
] strong as it ought to be now. AT any
. rate, the bar at that time proved itseli
j less sensitive to it's own honor, thar
. the bench did, and, though proceedings
were talked of at that time, they were
never brought.
But many things have happened since
! then. Higher standards are accepted
now. and 1t does not seem possible tina
} the Bar Association can allow the re-
= proach from the bench I'm this case u
go unheeded
The clear-cut statement OF his OF
| fetal position i'm such matters, by TN
t Attorney General, as published in In
$ Star last evening, makes clearer thal
1t would have been without that state
{ ment, the duty of the Bar Association
o The publicity of the charges agalhs
e Magoon as well as their seriousness
calls loudly for action by the profes
sion. The Bar Association Is the re
cognlzed means through which tn