Polynesian., 1855-07-21
SUPREME CoURT....Jus Term,

SUPREME COURT....JuIs Term.
Associate Justices ROBERTSON and u, on the
Bench.
The King vs.. Aono.-The prisoner was charged
| with having committed rape upon native girl,
named Mary Clifford. After the trial had COM
menced the prosecution was Withdrawn for want of
evidence.
A. B. Bates Esq. for the Crown.
/ J. w. Marsh, Esq. for the Prisoner
| The King vs. HaO.-The prisoner was indicted
foT stealing 1920, in money, the property of Messrs
Stuart s Rahe, of Honolulu The evidence for
the prosecution wholly circumstantial, and not
at all conclusive. Verdict not guilty.
A. b. Bates, ESQ. for the crown.
Il. P. Kaumaea, ESQ for the prisoner
The King VS.. LaLalO and MokupdRes The pris-
oners we're charged with having stolen wearing ap-
parel of the value of $50, from the house of one
John Lord near Honolulu. Verdict, guilty Sen
fenced to = years Imprisonment at hard labor and
a fine of one dollar each.
A. b. Bates, ESQ. for the crown.
d. X. Kaauwai, ESQ. for prisoners
The King VS. Keokeo and Maioe-The prisoners
were accused of perjury, in having testified falsely
in the Probate Court, in the matter of the will of
one Kaaikanaha, deceased Verdict, not guilty.
A. B. Bates, Esq. for the crown.
q. P. Kaumaea ESQ. for the prisoners.
TIE King vs. Nakilqku.-The prisoner was in
dicted for having forged document purporting to
be the Will of Kohake, late of KooIau, deceased.
Verdict guilty. Sentenced TO 2 years imprisonment
at hard labor.
4. B. Bates, Esq. for the crown
J. w. Marsh, Esq. for the prisoner.
The Hing vs.. Daniel Barren.-Accused had
been held to bail for trial in this Court on a charge
of smuggling, by the District Justice Of So;.th
Kona, Hawaii. This beinI an offense coming
within the Jurisdiction of District Justices the case
was remanded to the District Court Of South
kona for trial.
A. b. Bates, Esq. for the CROWN
G. &. Harris, Esq. for defendant.
William FtH Ct ais vs. ". c. P0rke.-This was
an acton of trover to recover $40 Geo. damages for
the conversion of the whale ship Z" Nile, +" former
" of San Franrisco, which vessel was attached
and sold BY the defendant, who is Marshal Of the
Hawaiian Islands, as the property Of Bailey * CHI
bert.
Defendants counsel moved for further contin-
uance in this cause, on the ground of the absence
of material witnesses. The court thought he had not
used ordinary diligence, since the last term, III
deayoring to procure the testimony he wished to
adduce and therefore refused the motto. The
case came on for tr al on the 5jh inst. during which
aud the following day, the plaintiffs made some pro-
gress in Introducing their proofs, but the court hay-
IN. ruled out foreign power Of att rney offered
by plaintiffs on the ground Of its execution not be-
establish the same By secondary evidence, they
asked the court to allow them to suffer non-suit
which was granted.
b J. ID. Blair. J. Montgomery, and c. L. Harris,
Esqrs. for plaintiffs
A. B. Bates ESQ. for defendant.
ThOs. RusssL ct ais vs. II. T. Flch.-A commits
sion issued in tins cause 10 tuke testimony in Con-
necticuI, not having been returned, on motion Of
defendant's counsel, the case was continued.
n ,.,d I ESorS f,r nio
tifs
A. B. Bates, Esq. for defendant.
4 G. Jones VS. HuaEini.-Ihis was an actlOn
brought to recover damages for breach of covenants
contained in a deed of land Defenda Is counsel
moved to dismiss, on the ground that he had not
been served with a copy of the deed IN Question to-
rether with copy Of plaintiff ; petit n according
to the statute, The motion was granted
J. d. Blair, ESQ. for plaintiff.
J.W. E. Maikal, ESQ. for defendant.
! l.. CQ7aJridge vs. S. c. Baker.-This was an
action of assumpsIt brought to recover the sum Of
S664 30. which the plaintiff claimed OF defendant
who is Master of the bark .'Whal Cheer, as COM
missions for having procured employment for said
bark while living az Hong Kong IN China, IN Au-
gust 1854 Verdict for Plaintiff
J. Montgomery, Esq. for plaintiff
A. B. Bates Esq. tor defendant.
-Jayss Selcqrd vs. " ". Matthsrs.--This was
an acton for SANDER After the plaintiff had rest
Cd his case, he was non-suted on the ground OF
variance and on the ground that the words proved
were not sctionable without special damage, which
was not alleged.
o. Hinton, Esq. for plaintiff.
]. D. Blair, ESQ. for defendant.
CkGs. DaaG, Agent Of Page, 6Gd0" Co.. vs.
B. r Angel
This was an action Of assumPsit brought tn re-
cover back the consideration money, paid oy FIain-
tiff to Defendant, n December last, Tor certain
bin of exchange, purporting to have been cra~n
by N. Anderson, master Of the whaling barr bar
"Chile, upon Benjamin b. Howard, OF New beo,
ford. which bill had been returned here protested
for ran-payment and which the plaintiff now aiIeg-
ed to be forgery. TIE biil was drawn for S'SOCo'
for which amount il had been transferred by the
JassnSsnt 70 ,be plaintiT without endorsement
No frspd was impuied 10 the deferdanes who IS an
derstood to have received The bill from lyman
Swan. Of the 6rn Of Swan s. Clifford, who aoscond-
cd some time a 90 from Honolulu, -
rhe court charged rhe jury that, where oii oi
exchange i sold aRd transferred hy one party 20
another. without endorsement, as had been dohe 10
,his r.se the law raised an implied warranty, on