Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1914-04-27
Dismissal of McCarn
Charges Suggested
!. M. Stainback CriticlzeS AC-
tion of U. S. District Attor-
ney but Does Not Find Suffi-
cient Grounds for DiSbar-
ment Proceedings.

Reviewing at length the evidence
adduced In his investigation made into
the charges preferred by George P.
ThieIpn against T. S District Attor-
ney Jeff McCarn. growing out Of the
suit for divorce filed by the latter on
behalf OF Mrs. Thielen. who was later
adiudged insane, !. NJ. StainbaCk, ter
ritorial attorney general. filed a state
ment with the supreme court this
morning in which he recommends
that the charges be dismissed
While he admits that there is room
for two opinions on whether Mr.. Nc
earn exercised the prudence OF good
lawyer in filing the suit under the
circumstances. he goes on to say that
he does not regard the charges in the
light OF the facts as brought out as
grave enough to warrant disbarment
proceedings.
This is the first opinion handed
down by the new attorney general
since taking office 1t is as follows:
Report Of the Attorney General.
This office has, at the request OF the
supreme court. made such inyestiga-
tion Of the facts relating to the
charges brought before said court in
the above entitled matter as the short
time at our disposal would permit
An analysis Of the affidavits and
statements both Of the parties to the
controversy and such witnesses as
this office has been able to interview
shows purported facts so absolutely
diverse and irreconcilable that this
office at this time cannot pass upon
the truth or falsity of a large proper
tion thereof In case IT should seem
TO the court necessary to reconcile the
conflicting statements of fact or to
determine which are true. 1t would
seem that such determination must
be in open court.
The charges Of Mr.. Thielen against
Mr.. McCarn are for professional mis-
conduct and in our opinion resolve
themselves into a determination Of
the following issues:
IN The propriety Of Mr.. McCarn
I'm filing or causing to be filed or al
lowing to be filed, the libel for di-
vorce after the interview with Mr..
Thielen and DR. Herbert.
go The acceptance Of a diamond
ring as security for tho fee of $50 90, 4
IO Jake UP ltlS SeCOHu iSSuS lltoAs
The facts in this connection. are in
the main undisPuted. Mr. McCarn re-
ceiyed the ring as security from Mrs.
Thielen before the interview with
Messrs Thielen and Herbert. The re-
ceipt which accompanies the
charges as Exhibit B suffi-
ciently states the purpose for
which the ring was deposited.
in the opinion of this office such a
proceeding is one which must be left
10 the determination of the individual
practitioner A further question, how
ever, still remains in this connection
to wit: the propriety of retaining this
ring as security for the payment Of
the reduced fee of $500 after the
discontinuance of the case after Mrs.
Thielen had been duly declared an
insane person and committed as such
to the asylum. w.. The merits of this
proceeding can be, and we understand
are about to be tested in another court
and hence we express no opinion on
this point.
AS to the first issue:
Knowing that this office would
probably be involved sooner or later
in the matter Of investigating these
charges, a representative of the office
was present at the commitment pro-
ceedings. The witnesses at the hear
ing were DR.. Schwallie, the physician
at the asylum, Rev. Dr. Scudder and
Mr.. Thielen. DR.. Herbert was not
called and did not appear Mr.. Nc
Carn's office was notified but he did
HtI1N
declared insane at the date of this
hearing, April 3. 1914, and in the opin-
ion OF this office, the evidence ad-
duCed at the hearing showed beyond
question that she had been in
sane for some time prior thereto,
and II is upon this view that this re-
port Is predicated.
Shortly after the divorce libel was
filed, Mr.. Thielen called at this Of
flee and requested that some action
he taken, stating substantially what
he has set forth in this affidavit A
representative of this office inter
viewed DR.. Herbert. and to him DR.
Herbert made substantially the same
statements as appear in his affidavit
1t may be added that Mr.. Thielen was
present at this interview. though not
by agreement. Mr.. Thielen was then
informed that this office would take
10 action whatever in the matter un-
til or unless he saw fit to make a
written complaint He thereupon
stated that he would prepare state
ments to be signed both by himself
and by Dr. Herbert. On April 1st,
these statements. signed by them.
were filed in this office, and dupli-
Gates thereof later filed in the court.
There appears to be no dispute over
the fact that Mrs. Thielen visited
Mr. McCarn several times and urged
him to take the case for her and re-
lated to him her troubles Suhstan-
ICnntinnad on maze siYH