The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1906-04-07
PARK FUNDS
MIDDLE
Attorney Peters Makes
New Move in the
Case.

E c. Peters attorney for the Pacific
selected by the kapiolani Park Com
mission as plaintiff in the mandamus
proceedings against the County Au-
ditor, by reason of the latter's refusal
to issue a warrant for the payment of
a bill incurred by the commission, the
Auditor acting on an opinion from
County Attorney Douthitt, will bring
another case into the Circuit Court,
this time selecting the Schuman Car
riage Co. as plaintiff. The two cases
win then be carried through to the
Supreme Court for final disposition,
and as quickly as possible
AS the matter now stands the coun-
w refuses to appropriate money for the
Kapiolani Park Commission on the
ground that by so doing it would be
committing an illegal act. The result
is that the Park Commission has no
money to continue the good work being
carried on at the park, the payrolls for
the past month have not been met and
bills for materials having not been
liquidated.
bringing another test case into court
is because of the alleged non-perform-
ance of an alleged agreement entered
into beween Mr.. Peters and the County
Attorney, which was that the original
case of the Pacific Oil Transportation
Co. should be submitted to the court
on an agreed statement of facts. That
there was such an understanding be-
tween Mr.. Peters and Mr.. Douthitt is
so stated by the former. However, MI
Douthitt claims on March Z to have
written to L. A Thurston, president
of the Park Commission. that he could
not enter into such an agreement, be-
ing a county officer and as such COM
PEELED to perform his duty, and stand
by his legal opinion already rendered
to the Supervisors. In this letter Mr..
Douthitt says he stated that he had
already rendered an opinion that the
appropriation of money for the parks
was illegal and therefore he would have
to fight along that line alone.
On March IS Mr.. Peters filed man
damus proceedings against the Coun-
ty Auditor Mr.. Peters says the COM
plant was shown to Mr.. Douthftt and
| the latter was to answer in ten days
upon the merits. That, he says. was
| agreed to
| Instead of fling an answer" said
Mr.. Peters yesterday, "he filed a mo-
ton to quash a demurrer That method
at once called up issues of law, anG
under the circumstances and by reason
of that fact, I am going to bring {
suit for the Schuman Carriage Com
pany and have both the cases brough
up together and then carry them t
the Supreme Court.
Mr. Douthitt stated yesterday tina
the whole matter was up to Peters. .
did file demurrer" said the Count,
Attorney. That was overruled and
was given five days to answer. In
4 stead, I filed the answer the very mex
4 day. So you see it's up to Mr.. Pc
tiers to make a motion to have tn
matter brought up for argument Their
is no delay on my part, but as Mr.. Re
4 tiers is personally engaged in the pros
i ecution of the defendant in the John
son murder case, I don't see how h
4 could very well come into court on TIL
matter. We don't want to delay at al
\ but want to get at the matter. TIL
delay is on Mr.. Peters side
Mr.. Douthitt exhibited his letter
8 Mr. Thurston dated March :, to sho'
4 that at that date he did not care
q submit the case on an agreed statemer
of facts.
Nevertheless, there seems to be a
i opinion that the countys method {
4 meeting the mandamus is for della.
and that by interfering legal techn
: calities the matter could be held u
indefinitely.
Meanwhile the park goes to ruin.