Governor Carcieri last night blasted the Charlestown Town Council for refusing to go along with his plan to have a prominent attorney represent the state in a landmark case before the U.S. Supreme Court that will ultimately decide who will control 31 acres of Narragansett Indian land in Charlestown.

In a letter hand-delivered to the four council members’ homes last night, Carcieri said he was writing to express his “extreme outrage at the irresponsible actions” of the council. “You have helped create a circus-like atmosphere that has made the town appear indecisive, arrogant and indifferent to the best interests of all the residents of our state.”

The Town Council president is calling for a special meeting this morning to discuss the governor’s request.

The governor wrote that by refusing to appoint former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson to represent the state and the town, the council “put at risk the very chance that our arguments will be given a fair hearing.”

“The court could very well decide not to hear our case and let the awful decision of the court of appeals stand, [to] the extreme and lasting detriment of our entire state.

“We need the best representation in the country to argue the case,” the governor continued. “You must rectify this by acting now to appoint Mr. Olson to represent the town. … This must be done tomorrow morning so that we may notify the United States Supreme Court by noon.”

The governor’s letter is the latest volley in a dispute over who would best represent the state in a suit Rhode Island brought against the Department of Interior almost a decade ago. The case challenges a decision by the department to take 31 acres in Charlestown in trust for the Narragansett Indian tribe. Trust status would free the land from most state and local laws and place it under federal and tribal control. Rhode Island and Charlestown leaders fear it could open the door to a casino or other venture immune to state oversight. The state, which was joined in the suit by Charlestown, has lost in all the lower courts. The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case on Monday.

The Town Council has wanted the case to be argued by the town’s assistant solicitor of Indian affairs, Joseph S. Larisa Jr. Larisa is intimately familiar with all the details of the case and has argued the issue in lower courts over the past decade. This would be Larisa’s first Supreme Court appearance.

But the governor and Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch want the state to be represented by Olson, an attorney who has tried 50 Supreme Court cases, including the one that decided the 2000 presidential election in George W. Bush’s favor.

A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court rejected the town’s request that Rhode Island’s half-hour of arguing time be split among lawyers. The court clerk has ordered the parties to submit a letter, signed by Larisa and Olson, choosing a single attorney by noon today.

Acting Town Council President James M. Mageau said he received the governor’s letter at about 7:30 last night and plans to call an emergency meeting of the council this morning.

Mageau said he knows that at least two of the other three council members had seen the letter. “I don’t know what they’re going to do with it,” he said in a telephone interview last night.

Mageau said he agrees with the governor’s position that Olson should represent the state, after initially backing the town’s assistant solicitor for the job.

“I’ve changed my mind based on so many people who have criticized me,” he said. Mageau also said he was persuaded by the comments of Laurence Tribe, a professor at Harvard University and a leading constitutional scholar, who said: “The obvious solution is for Ted Olson to argue the case. He’s much more experienced … But if they find that unpalatable, they should flip a coin and grow up.”

The governor’s letter did not appear to win over Harriet Allen, another council member.

“To me, it sounds like a pique-ish, childish, irresponsible letter,” she said by telephone last night. “To have it delivered to a woman living alone in the woods at 8 at night, he should have known better. It doesn’t sound like it’s penned by the governor I know.”

Allen said that as far as she was concerned, the dispute had already been resolved by the two attorneys when they both suggested to the court that the time should be divided, with 20 minutes going to Olson and 10 minutes to Larissa.

“We’ve always, in Charlestown, wanted both extremely talented lawyers to represent the case.”

She dismissed as “hogwash” the governor’s contention that the dispute over who should argue the case could cause the the case to be thrown out.

“It’s in God’s hands or in the Supreme Court’s hands now. Let them decide.”

A third council member, Bruce Picard, said he had earlier supported Larissa, but based on the governor’s letter, is now leaning toward Olson.

“If we lose this case, I would hate for the whole state to jump down our throat,” he said.

The fourth council member, Kate Waterman, could not be reached late last night.

One of the council’s five seats is vacant.

tbarmann@projo.com