Morse v. Robertson

• Decision Date: 13 July 1893
• Citation: 9 Haw. 195
• Parties: JAMES MORSE ET AL. v. J. R. ROBERTSON, DEFENDANT; MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR, GARNISHEE.
• Court: Hawaii Supreme Court

9 Haw. 195

JAMES MORSE ET AL. v. J. R. ROBERTSON, DEFENDANT; MINISTER OF THE INTERIOR, GARNISHEE.

Supreme Court of Republic of Hawai'i.

July 13, 1893.

HEARING JULY 5, 1893.

ASSUMPSIT.

APPEAL FROM DISTRICT COURT OF HONOLULU.

Syllabus by the Court

The Government owed defendant a balance due on a contract to build a bridge. The plaintiffs garnisheed the Minister of the Interior.

Held That the said balance due the defendant could not be attached, and that defendant was not a Government beneficiary within the meaning of Chapter 50, Laws of 1890.

A Rosa, for plaintiffs.

Attorney-General W. O. Smith and J. A. Magoon, for defendant and garnishee.

JUDD C.J., BICKERTON AND FREAR, JJ.

OPINION

BICKERTON J.

The plaintiffs sued the defendant in the District Court of Honolulu for $300.00 due them for work done by them on the Waimea bridge, Oahu, at the request of the defendant, who had a contract to build the same for the Hawaiian Government, alleging that defendant was an employee of the Interior Department of the Hawaiian Government, and that said Government was indebted to defendant for services rendered as such employee, whereupon a garnishee process was served on the Minister of the Interior. After hearing, the district court gave judgment for the plaintiffs for $225.00 and costs, and also found that defendant was not a government beneficiary under the Act of 1890, and the garnishee was discharged.

The case now comes here on appeal from said district court on a point of law, viz., " whether or not the defendant is a government beneficiary under Chapter 50, Laws of 1890." There is no dispute as to the fact that the defendant had a contract to build the said bridge for the Hawaiian Government, and that there was still money due and owing to him by said Government on said contract. The question is, can this money be attached by defendant's creditors under the said Act?

Section 1 reads as follows:

Any officer or employee, or other person in the service of the Hawaiian Government, or in receipt of, or entitled to a salary, stipend, wages, annuity or pension from the said Government, or any department, board or bureau thereof, shall, for the purposes of this Act, and of any proceedings hereunder, be known and described as a government beneficiary, hereinafter denominated such beneficiary.

Section 2 reads as follows:

The salary, stipend, wages, annuity or pension of such beneficiary may be attached for, and applied in the payment of his debts, in the manner prescribed in this Act.

Section 1 defines who shall be considered a government beneficiary. It is clear that it only applies to an officer or employee or one in the service of the Hawaiian Government who is in receipt of or entitled to a...