The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1906-08-01

/ In the supreme court OF the Aeliito1 J
| of Hawaii, in the matter of Isaac Har
bottle, appeal from the Auditor of the
Territory.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE.
A difference of opinion having arisen
| between J. II. Fisher, Auditor of the
| Territory of Hawaii, and Isaac Harbot-
tie, a person employed by the Govern
ment of the Territory of Hawaii and
the said Isaac Harbottle feeling ag-
grieved by a decision of the said Audi
tor refusing to allow a demand present
ed by such person makes this his appeal
from such decision of said Auditor to
the Justices of the Supreme Court, and
as statement of the question or diff
ference of opinion alleges as follows:
That j. II. Fisher is the duly qualified
and acting Auditor of the Territory of
Hawaii, and was such at all times
hereinafter mentioned.
That Isaac Harbottle, the appellant
herein is and was at all times herein
after mentioned an employee in the ser
vice of the Territory of Hawaii to wit,
clerk in the Office of the Assessor, un
der the Treasurer of the Territory of
Hawaii, in the receipt of monthly sal
airy of seventy-fve $3.50 dollars.
That on or about the 22d day of Au-
gust, 1904, Levers & Cooke, Limited,
brought an action in assumpsit against
appellant in the Circuit Court of the
First Circuit, No. 1912, Law, and made
the Territory party thereto by serving
upon the Auditor of the Territory a
copy of the summons and complaint
therein.
That on the 14th day of October,
1904, Judgment was rendered against
said appellant for the sum of $522.63
and ON or about said day notice of said
Judgment was served upon said Auditor.
That the said Auditor has sequestered
out of the salary of appellant one-quar-
ter on each and every month from the
date of the said service Of garnishee
process on him, that appellant is in
formed and believes and therefore al
leges that in October, 1904, the said
Auditor drew signed and delivered to
the Judgment creditor or to their order,
warrants deducting $3.50 from appel
liant IS salary for August and September,
and 5000 for October, and $3.50 for
the months of November and December.
1904. That for the month of January,
1904, and thereafter up to and includ
ing the month of June, 1906, inclusive,
the said Auditor has drawn, signed and
delivered to the said judgment creditor
warrants each month amounting to
$18.75, and that for the month of July
1906, he has drawn and signed a war
rant for like sum.
That the total payments on the said
debt amount to $423.S3 as stated here
matter.
That in May, 1908, one Charles Viii
cox brought suit against appellant in
the District Court of Honolulu, making
the Territory party, as garnishee, by
the Auditor, notified said Auditor by
serving copy of the summons on him,
and on May %, 1905, recovered judg-
ment for the sum of $S9.47 with inter
est at 8 per cent per annum from said
day; that on or about the said day a |
notice of such judgment was served on
said garnishee as required by the |
statute.
That the said Auditor claims that the |
said judgment of $s9.47 with interest at
8 per cent. is a junior claim against the |
salary of your appellant, upon the ex.
of the prior punishment |
and judgment.
That the said Auditor has drawn, is |
sued and delivered to the Judgment |
creditor, Levers & Cooke, Limited, the |
aforesaid warrants amounting to four
hundred and twenty three dollars
and eighty three cents {s423.S3)
that he has drawn a warrant for |
July, 1906, in the sum of $1s.75 payable |
to said judgment creditor, as appellant |
is informed and believes, but whether
said warrant has been signed and deliv-
cred TO the Judgment creditor is not in /
formed.
That there remains unpaid on the
said judgment, exclusive of interest,
and including the said last mentioned
sum of $1s.75 the sum of $3.50, which
sum is unpaid on the said judgment.
That on July "a, 1906, the appellant
demanded of the said Auditor that he
10 not sequester the said quarter of the
said salary of appellant, and that he
oay TO appellant the full salary earned
" him, stating among other things that
he ground for such demand was that
he Chapter 136 of the Revised Laws