Saturday press. [volume] (Honolulu, H.I.) 1880-1885, 1881-01-15
Supreme Court, January Term.


Loo Ngawk we'll known Chinese merchant of
this city brought charge of illegal arrest and as
sault by member of the Honolulu police force.
Mr.. Bckerton treated the accused leniently by
letting him off with fine of SIS. The defendant
however, influenced by other members of "the
force,' decided to appeal, and the wasaccord-
ingly tried last week, before Hawaiian jury
and Chief Justice Harris The facts of the
case briefly these police officer discovered
dead rat in Hotel street. opposite the premises
of Messrs. Sin Chong 81 Co. He insisted on its
moval, which was effected after slight aterca-
ton with the supposed offending party. Mr.. Loo
Ngawk, who was in his office at the time reading
letter, presented himself at his front door, and
mildly requested the policeman to 81 move on " and
not to make such noise, more especially on ac-
count of it being the Sabbath day. In his address
to the " man in blue" he told him he was I'M
necessarily officious, and was also accused of in
Producing strong adjectives. common to the Eng
lish language, but this was not proven. Thereupon
the policeman sprang at him. like cat at a mouse,
clutched him by the front of his shirt, which, by
tire way, happened to be his night shirt not hay
ing yet clothed himself in his Sunday apparel, and
dragged him out of his own house into the muddy
street, distance of about 30 or 40 feet He en-
treated to be allowed to clothe himself, but this
not permitted by the herculean policeman.
He was taken to the police station in state of
stable, by name McKeague, was apparently in
charge at the police station at the time, and he
ordered Mr.. Loo Ngawk to be detained. The
arrest was performed with unadvisable severity
for which Hawaiian constables celebrated. He
found himself thoroughly bruised all over from
the effects of the treatment received at the hands
of the policeman and his assistants. About 10
O'clock Marshal Parke came to the station house
and ordered the release of Mr.. Loo Ngawk No
charge" was found on the slate, not even that
set up by the defence at the Supreme Court, viz
Swearing y Mr.. Loo Ngawk turned complainant
and the offending policeman dealt with, as
stated above. Mr.. Hatch conducted the prosecu-
ton and Mr. Davidson defended the prisoner. 1t
was attempted to prove that Mr.. Loo Ngawk was
a wealthy man and given to high living, and in the
habit of using profane language and that he was
guilty of resisting the police, but in this the de-
fence signaIly failed. On the other hand, Deputy
Marshal Dayton testified to the accused being one
of the best and quetest men i'll the forces neither
did Marshal Parke know him to be over ofiicous.
The Marshal also knew Mr.. Loo Ngawk to be a
quiet orderly person and had never heard him
swear. The learned counsel for the defence con-
sdered this of vital Importance which 1t un-
doubtedly is. He argued that the law provides
that if a constable the law violated 1t Is his
duty to arrest the offender on the spot. Mr. Hatch
did not work upon the Imagination OF the Jury
but made clear and straightforward state
ment of facts, and left the case III their hands.
His Honor, in summing up, told the Jury that the
policeman had not the right to lay finger ON MIR.
Loo Ngawk. Before a man is arrested, IT is the
duty of the police officer to tell the offender that
he is about to arrest him and also must state to
him, the offence Tor winch In hrrtstcu. IL the
policemen does not do this, every citizen ON whom
he lays his hand has right to resist him and even
to strike him, and Furthermore the friends of the
arrested marty have decided right to intercede.
The law was clearly laid down on this point and
in order that the jury might clearly understand u,
His Honor quoted from the Penal Code Chapter ~
as follows: ,
..SEcrIoN 2. Where breach of the peace or other
offence has been committed, and the offender
shall endeavor to escape, he may be arrested by
virtue of verbal order of any magistrate, or With
out such order, If no magistrate be present
g. At or before the time of making an arrest, the
person must declare that he is officer of justice,
II such be the case. II he have warrant he should
show it if required or II he make the arrest with
| out warrant in any of the cases in which 1t IL
| authorized by law, he should give the party ar
rested clearly to understand for what cause he I'M
dertakes to make the arrest, and must require INN
| TO submit and accompany him to the jail Or mag
| istrate This done, the arrest Is complete"
| The Jury retired but unable to come 10 any
| conclusion AZ TO whether the policeman was guilty
| or not. They were dismissed, and His Honor Or
hdersd that the policeman he discharged from the
| force and ON account be re-appointed, au-
| thorized by Section 266 of the Civil Code.
| His Honor addressed him az follows =" am
amazed 10 ses this case brought up here. This
| man kuovs the law or ought 70 know It, and his
chiefs osrtainly do know II. adyerted 70 y yes
tsrday (Chap. " Sections and Penal Code:
| "N0w there Ia justification for this assault
whatsoever, there Ii no pretense that this gentle
| man Who WAS sitting in his own house ON Sunday
| and il well-known citizen, Was attempting "a
escape from anybody or anything. Nor II there
any pretense that the officer, arresting him VIC
lently, even told him what he was about 10 arrest
him for, or gave him to understand either clearly