The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1882-01-07
SUPREME COURT.
BzFoBE Nh. JUsTIcE McCULLT.
Monday. January 2nd.


The Court opened at 10 A. NJ, but the day be-
ing a public holiday in place Of New Years Day,
His Honor, after passing the compliments Of the
season 20 the members Of the Bar who were pres
eut, adjourned the Court TO
Tuesday, January 3rd.
The King v VIM. Davis. Manslaughtcr in
ist degree. This was the case of mRnslaughter
on the steamer AMER Head. Mr.. +. Preston ap-
peared for the defendant who pleaded mot
guilty" The ACKNOWLEDGEMENT intimated to the
Court that Mr.. Hartwell had been retained by
friends Of the deceased and that the prosecution
would be conducted by him. The following jur-
ors were then sworn Messrs. A. +. Cooke, F..
A. Dudoit, {. I. Wolfe, c. Bolte, +. kistlsr, II.
G.. Crabbe. W. A. Bowen. :. NJ. Damon. s. C.
Allen, G. Emmes. C. o. Berger aud K. Lishman.
Mr.. Preston asked that the jury be permitted 20
view the scene of the homicide before the case
was gone into. Mr.. Hartwell objected on the
ground that the law was. that the whole testi-
mony must be heard before viewing the locus ia
gao, and that no evidence must be taken after
wards. The ease was then proceeded with. The
evidence disclosed nothing that differed materi-
ally from the story as related in last Saturdays
p. c. ADVERTISERS. After the evidence for the
defence had been given the jury intimated TO the
Court that they were unwilling to so on board
the ship as they thought that IL would not assist
them in arriving at their verdict. After the jury
had been addressed by counsel for the defense,
His Honor charged them ut some length. He
pointed out that the accused was responsible for
the careful handling of n weapon the dangerous
character of which he understood, and that the
jury's task was to judge by the evidence whether
there had been any inexcusahle negligence on
his part whereby the accident had happened.
After a short retirement the jury brought in n
verdict of guilty of manslaughter in the third de-
gree, one juror dissenting. His Honor reserved
sentence until he should himself order the case
to be called on again.
Wednesday, January 4th.
The calendar of cases for the Hawaiian Jury
was called over.
Mr.. A. 5. Hartwell then, on behalf of the
Crown, read the indictment against Hon. w. Nj.
Gibson for libel, when MIR. Preston filed a de-
murrer which was read by MIR. Russell. (See
extended report of this case in another column
The King vs Kuhimana. This was AZ appeal
from the District Justice of Eva, the charge
being larceny. The jury brought in a verdict of
guilty.
The KIM VS. Koloa. This was also a., appeal.
Koloa had been convicted of larceny when tried
by the Police Justice, and q majority OF the jury
formed n similar opinion of the case, bringing
in a verdict of guilty, three jurors dissenting.
This was the case of larceny from the dwelling
house of Mr.. p. c.. Jones.
The King VS. Frank Davis. Assault with dan
gerous weapon. This charge arose out of the
shooting case which occurred on the premises
of Mr.. A. Fernandez, in Beretania-street The
prisoner having no counsel, the Court requested
Mr.. Russell to conduct the case for him. No
facts not already made public were disclosed by
evidence. The jury returned II unanimous ver-
diet of guilty.
The King VS. Ale larceny. Appeal from de-
cision of the District Justice of Koolaupoko.
Mr.. Holokahiki appeared for the defendant. and
Mr.. Cecil Brown was with the Deputy Attorney
General for the prosecution. The case was
taken at Z pm, and and at a quarter-past 10
the Court adjourned to
Thursday, January 9TH,
when n verdict Of not guilty was returned, the
jury being unanimous.
His Honor intimated that he would hear argu-
ment on the demurrer in The King Va w. NJ.
Gibson, on Saturday morning at 10 o'clock.
The civil causes for the Hawaiian jury were
then proceeded with.