The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1909-10-22
IS NOT PROPER,
SAY JUSTICES
County Attorneys Withdraw from
Scott Case After Opinions
Are Rendered.

The opinions rendered by the justices
of the supreme court Of the Territory
during the discussion as to whether it
would be proper for County Attorney
John W. Cathcart and his deputy, f.
W. Milverton, to appear against the
Territory in civil suit, will probably
set precedent that viii put a stop
to the practise in future.
Attorney General Hemenway, and
Attorneys Cathcart and 1Iilverton. at
torneys for the plaintiff in the pend
ing action Of Mrs. Scott, appeared in
response TO the following letter ad-
dressed to them Wednesday:
The supreme court desires to hear
you tomorrow morning at ten
o'clock upon the question whether
county attorney or deputy eoun-
ty attorney ought to be permitted
to conduct the above case against
the Territory. Yours truly,
J. A. THOMPSON,
Clerk Supreme Court.
The chief justire called the lawyers
attention to the fact that the attorney
general would not for moment allow
his appointed deputy to appear in a pro-
ceeding against the Territory and that
the statute made county attorneys his
deputies. Milverton said that he con
sidered that the duties Of the county
attorneys, as defined in the County Act,
did not preclude their representing
eases against the Territory, but that
he and Catheart wished TO withdraw
from the case if any of the justices had
the slightest doubt as to the propriety
of their representing the plaintiff in
the case against the Territory.
Cathcart said that when he took the
case for the plaintiff, who was an old
client of his, it did not occur to him
that there could be any objection to
that course but that he would with
draw from the case ii any of the court
thought that he ought to do so. The
attorney general said that he eonsid-
cred it question merely of ethics
which each person would decide for
himself.
at is my view" said Justice Perry,
"that neither the city and county at
torney nor his deputy may properly
appear for the plaintiff in this case, or
in any other case, against the Terri
tory
Justice Wilder stated that aside from
any question as to the legal right OF
county attorney TO represent party
in an action against the Territory, he
was of the opinion that it is improper
for him to do SO, particularly in view
of the impression generally on the com
munity. which would be bad, that OF
allowing. a government officer to pros
ecute a private claim against the gov
eminent.
II think county attorneys ought not
to appear in any civil case against the
Territory" said Chief Justice Hartwell,
''any more than against the county,
not only because it looks badly and
makes an unfortunate impression on the
community, but because | think 1t IS
wrong. I cannot discover the interests
of the county from those of the Terri
tory. Moreover, as deputies of the at
torney general, made so by statute, it
would be the duty of the county attor-
neys, as / conceive it, although the
statute does not require them to do so
to report to the attorney general any
material matters which come to theil
knowledge affecting the interests of the
Territory. They could not do this while
bringing cases against the Territory.
am very glad that Messrs. Cathcart and
| Milverton wish to withdraw from the
| case if any of us think that they ought
to do so and I respect them for tax
| ing this course rather than the opposite
I think they ought to withdraw from
all connection with this case.
Thereupon Mr.. Catheart asked per
mission for himself and Mr.. MilvertoI
to retire from the case.