The Hawaiian gazette., 1873-11-12
HAKrwELL, J.:


HARTwELL, J.:
|. A writ of habeas corpus was issued OF
a sworn petition in behalf of the relator
Wong Sow, alleging that he was illegally
detained on the Italian steamer Glensan
nox, in the port of Honolulu, and deprived
of the right to come on shore. The cause
of restraint alleged by the respondent was
a contract between the relator and Messrs
Meigs, Hubble and Grytzell, made at Ma.
Gao, whereby he agreed to serve said
Meigs, Hubble and Grytzell and their as
signs for eight years from arrival at Puntes
Arenas, in Costa Rica, and acknowledged
the receipt of eight dollars and three suits
of clothing in advance. The petition al
legged cruel treatment on the vessel. There
was evidence that the relator tried to talk
with some one on shore, and was thereup-
on beaten and driven down below; that
several Chinese on board tried to talk
with some one on shore, when a man on
board blew whistle, and several men
with pieces Of knotted rope commenced
to drive the coolies aft" The relator was
ordered to be discharged from the re-
straint.
At the argument on the appeal, the re-
lator's counsel desired ruling merely on
the respondents right to retain the relator
in custody, and waived all objections to
the contract or on the ground of cruelty.
/ have been unable to find legal au-
I thority for the restraint shown, by reason
of this contract executed in China, to
serve in Costa Rica. Our statutory law
seems to me to be imperative in requiring
the Court to issue the writ and order the
discharge.
The privilege of the writ of habeas
corpus belongs TO oil men, and shall not
be suspended unless by the King when in
case of rebellion or invasion the public
safety shall require its SUSPENSION
Co,aSt, Art. 5.
q No person shall be subject to punish
ment for any offence except on due and
legal conviction thereof. in Court hav-
ing jurisdiction of the case III, Art. 6.
"No person shall be deprived of life,
liberty or property without due process of
law. III, Art. 8.
The laws are obligatory upon all per-
sons, whether subjects of this kingdom or
citizens or subjects OF any foreign State,
while within the limits Of this Kingdom,
except SO far as exception is made by the
law of nations in respect to ambassadors
or other persons'- CiUa Code, Sect. 6.
" Every person restrained Of his liberty
Except in restraint under process OF |
Court). may prosecute as of right writ
of habeas corpus according to the provi-
sions of this Act, to obtain relief from
such restraint, if unlawful "-Sect. l.,
Ha6eas Corpus act Of 1870.
The Court or Justice to whom such
complaint shall be made, shall without |
delay sward aid issue a writ of habeas
corpus"-I6. Sect 4.
If no legal cause for the Imprisonment
or restraint shall be shown, the party shall
be Immediately discharged therefrom."-
ID, Sect. 81.
BY certain treaties we are bound to give
up on official request by the Treaty Pow
ers, persons accused of certain crimes and
deserving seamen. The present case comes
Within none Of these requirements.
There are no statutes which declare
that the privilege of habeas corpus NAV
be denied to persons en- route for other
countries, or that foreigners may use any
forcible restraint on each other here which
subjects cannot also use. do not know
by what authority the Court can declare
that such privilege may be denied, or such
power held by foreigners which is denied
TO subjects; but the clear and strong lam
guage OF our Habeas Corpus Act prevents,
as / think, any judicial discretion in the
matter
see no way to avoid discbarging the
relator from the restraint upon his person.
This is not a suit in equity wherein relief
may be refused if the Court suspect it to
be desired as a means of escaping legal
If creditor seek to hold
his debtors person as security for debt, or
10 prevent breach of contract, do not
know how Court can say that the re-
straint shall continue because the debt
may otherwise be lost On the contrary,
the creditor must rely on his legal remedy.
and would not be permitted to use his
own personal force Public imprisonment
FOR debt is everywhere strictly matter
er fori; whether Costa Rican law permits
his class Of contracts to be enforced in
oerSondn1, or not, do not know; but if
such be the law there, and if the relator
be legally bound TO proceed there to per-
orm his contract, that gives no right of
private coercion.
Nor is this masters complaint of his
servants willful desertion, under our
Masters and Servants Act. If it were.
hen complaint of cruelty and objections
o the contract itself which are now with
lrawn, would be in point And if the
'ervant under such complaint were ad-
judged guilty, or ordered back to service.
lie might prefer public imprisonment. and
10 bodily compulsion could legally be
,sed to make him return.
Finally, this is not an Admiralty case.
n which Court could decline iurisdic-
ion on the ground that the cause of ac-
ion arose abroad, and that the foreigners
'Ould be sent home for justice. This is a
ort upon the person, committed within
he geographical jurisdiction of this Court.
lad the relator sued for damages for false {
or assault, or if public
prosecution therefor had been instituted,
plea TO the jurisdiction could not have
'een verified by the facts of the case, for
he parties and the act were here.
Regarding our enacted law as peremp- I
DRY over the case, have not considered ;
ta r,olfox- 0f - D. 7 j. ! .