The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1868-08-29

custody. He swore TO his alsehoods with the u
most unconcern and nonehalencc. From the na;ur,
Of the testimony, although the ease was n clear oae
Of guilt, tie jury rendered a verdict Of not guilty
Attorney General for the Crown.
kcawrhunahala for defendants.
The King IS. Nuuhiwa. on the charge Of einbez-
element. was a case that excited much interest.
Nuuhiwa. u former school agent. was charged with
rmhczzling $500 Of the public school fund. and
pleaded not guilt. 1t appeared in evidence upon
the trial that he had used $500 Of the Government
funds in his bands. but with the intention OF return
ing it. Upon the appointment Of his successor he
acknowledged the fact. and promised TO pay the
amount This be did with an additional SO. more
than the acknowledged deficiency. IL was con-
tended that 10 constitute the onensc Ui embeZzle-
mrnt. there must bee a fraudulent intent clearly
manifested and that where the party accounts for
the deficiency, and there is an absence Of fraud. he
is not guilty of The ofense. Under the Instructions
of the Court. the jury evidently took this view OF
the matter, and returned a verdict of not guilty.
Attorney General for the Crown.
". Z. Jones Tor The defendant
An ODHlHh gGGterim case was next disposed of.
This was the a~rraigument and joint trial of four
persons for an ofrnse that only two can commit
to wit, adultery. This singular legal plurality OF a
case was the King as. J. ". Kahele * and Pono
(w), d.. kaulei () and Panelua (w), two men and
two women. 1t probably saved time to jumble the
cases together. but was it not against law and pre-
cedent? Could not Uncle Sam with the same pro-
priety try Brigham and all Utah on the charge Of
bigamyG 1t. however. succeeded very well in the
case before the Court, as there were no exceptions
to it, and all The parties were found guilty and pun
ished as they deserved. the kdnes each condemned
to pay a fine of $50. and the Wdhines S25 each.
May they learn to be more virtuous and happy.
Attorney General for the Crown.
keawehunahala for defendants.
Monday morning. the 10th, was fixed for the trial
of Mary Kokai Tor the murder of her husband, q
Chinaman by the name OF kokai, by poisoning.
The Indictment charged that she knowingly mixed
three drachms of the white oxide of arsenic in some
rice that she had prepared for kokai's breakfast,
and gave it TO him to eat, knowing that the poison
would produce death that he did eat of the rice,
and died from the effects of the poison. She pleaded
not guilty, and II long and interesting trial followed
The most important witnesses were Cinnamon,
aud their testimony was contradictory and con-
hicting. The witnesses of Kokai's sickness and
death were Chiana. Kiana and Goana. They con-
CURED in the statement that on the morning of the
18th of October. 1867, Kokai was in bed in his
room in koloa that about 9 y. NJ, Mary brought
his rice in a bowl and set it before him that she
woke him. and he ate one spoonful, when Mary took
her clothes aud went to the brook to wash. One
of the witnesses swore that Koiai was about TO
take a spoonful Of the rice as Mary left another,
that she brought the rice in a saucepan and poured
it out in the bowl. They all stated that he ate three
spoonfuls in all, and complained that the taste was
dcrid and bitter, and that be was Immediately taken
sick and went out to vomit. lie sent for Mary
where she was washing, but she did not come Till
Slt. MAS sent fOT a second ilulc. W nCu she came,
she was kind and attentive 10 kokai. No person
saw her put any poison iii the rice no person ever
saw any poison in her possession. She had no mo-
tive to poison her husband, as the proof showed
that they lived a~micably together. DR.. Smith. of
kOloa. swOrc that some ten days before kokai's
death he sold three drachms Of arsenic to 4 China
man he thinks it was Alona, but was not positive
that lie was the person. The Chinese witness GOana
stated that on the Thursday before kOkaiis death.
Alona came and gave him a small bottle contain
ing 4 white drug like starch, and told him To give
il to Mary. which he did. Alona told him that il
was i medicine to cure kokai of his appetite for
smoking opium, and he thought it a good drug. 1t
NAV be as well here tn state that public opinion
accuses this witness of being the poisoHer, and that
this portion III his testimony was not given before
Lilikalani. the Coroner and committing Magistrate.
Ii appears like an aftcr-thought, as If made up for
the occasion. The jury evidently did not believe
him. IL WIS proven that three days before the
death of Kukai. this witness (GOana) predicted the
death of KOkai by poison. and said u Chinaman in
Lihue had the drug TO do II. But hokai during his
deadly sickness complained of no one. and suspi-
cioned no one, least of all his wife Mary, whom lac
cOnided III to the last.
He died at II NJ. three hours after he had eaten
the rice, a very short time for the operation of
arsenic. The poison had not been boiled in the
rice it had been thrown on il after ii had been
boiled and prepared. IL was dry and unmixed on
the surface. according TO the testimony of DIR. j.
". Smith and Professor Kinney. of Honolulu. The
Professor gave his testimony in Il scientific manner
touching his analysis of the poison in the rice. the
stomach. and the contents OF the stomach and ac-
cOrding To the most approved tests, the presence of
arsenic in large quantities was detected. The tcsti-
mony of the Chinese witnesses was so variable from
what they had sworn on II former occasion aud so
contradictory, that it Is doubtful if tbeiinr gave il
any credence. especialiyS shcn it is considered that
as strong y not stronger. proofs can be brought
against one of them rs against Mary Kokai.
The attorney for the defendant addressed the
jury several hours, and was ably replied 10 by the
Attorney General. The Chief Justice made II clear
and explicit charge to the jury. who retired ut %
minutes to ) Z. NJ. and returned a verdict of not
gttlfy a few minutes after IL o'clock ut night. The
verdict was i'll accordance with public opinion.
which attaches guilt To the witnesses rather than
Mary.
Attorney General for the Crown.
". C.. Jones for defendant.
The King rs. Alona. Indictment for murder by
poisoning. By agreement OF counsel under The law
Of the last session OF the Legislative Assembly. this
case is To- he tried AT the next October term of the
Supreme Court in Honolulu.
Attorney General for the Crown.
W. &. Jones for defendant.
There were four appeals in cases for disabling
liquor G. gun-harrel tea y in Haualei but as the
bonds for costs were not fled in time, they Were
not placed upon the docket. \ motion was made
To have the bohds filed HUnc pro tune, on account
Of the absence of the Magistrate from his district
during the greater part of the ten days. The Court
decided that the bond for costs should be properly
taken before the Magistrate, but Overruled the mo-
ton.
The foreign jury had but one case to try that
was ID. l.. Fyle Us. Bischoff K Co. (Waipa Planta-
tion) Ii was an action OF trespass on the case for
breach OF contract. Verdict Tor plaintlff dam
ages, 5000 aud costs.
". c.. Jones for plaintiff.
ii. Thompson for defendants.
The last case tried was Isaac Hart kapnniai IS.
Kekupu. IN eiectneut for the recovery of a kuleana
in Koloa. Plaintiff claimed As the devisee of IA
puniai. and defendant claimed as the ADMINISTRATIVE
of the late J. IL. Paehewa deceased, under "A lost
deed from the said kapuniai 70 the said j. III. Pae-
- - = .-.- -.------.-L ...-- ----.- ----