The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1888-04-21

dutiablc goods"
And in the third count, a conspi-
racy that this 9Jeadom "be know
ingly concerned in carrying, remov-
ing, depositing and dealing in GER
tain imported articles, to wit,
certain spirituous liquors, the legal
duties upon which would and then
and there did amount TO the amount,
to wit, five hundred dollars, and
upon which no duties should have
been paid at the time and times
when the said w. S. Luce should
be so knowingly concerned in the
carrying, removing depositing and
dealing in said goods, in fact paid,
and to commit the offence of being
knowingly concerned in the carry
ing, removing and depositing of GER
tain dutiable goods, the legal duties
upon which would and then and
there did amount to the sum of five
hundred dollars, and upon which no
duties have been paid" This last
count charges "a conspiracy to COM
nit an offence against the laws Of
an nnintnndnd ristoka ne tbern ore
M nnl,lic laws ovcnnt ,hoso of tho
i.irrdow of tho IIowo;ior Ts,,nds
(I\-Tbo ind,ctment is nod ne 4
chSrnos . violation Of tho revenue
laws committed Jan. 2S, 1887, and
docs moi aver that sncb violation
wos not discovered within six months
thorooftor NJ, tbot tbis nrosecutiop
l. ,ronubt within civ ,pontbe ,ftnr
tho discovery Sect Gs1 of tho
civil code reouires call suits for
violation of INV nrovision of tba ro-
venue laws TO he BROUGHT within six
months after surb violation is dis
covered - That n criminal nrosecu.
t;on is meant ne we'll ne suits for
forfeiture of poods is evident from
the sections in The same ,honter
esnecinllv Sect GS4. Gin case onv
narson conyictod nf or offenre
a~ainst the revnnno lave F." and Scot
GO which nrovides tbat in certain
cases tbc Minister umov direct onv
nrosacntion for sucb fina non.ltv or
forreiinrn to ba discont;nuad ;, etc
Il. $. vs.. Hirscb. 100 u. S. "a,
Where the indictmpnt foIes to
show that an offence bos not onlv
heen committed bnt is nnnishohlo #
ia demurrable. It is an essential in
oredient in this offence and to oiv.
ing the court iurisdietion over t..
that if shall have becn committed
within six months of the nrosecu-
ton therefor or that it was not dis
covered until within such six months.
AS such essential fact, it must he
ovemcd else there is no iurisdic-
tion
r. s VS. Watkins 2 Cr 4l2 IT,
8. ys. White i Or SS and > Greens
Or Rem. 255
The first count is had as it. fails
to sct forth what thc ALLEGED ufalse
nretenses', we're and to Whom they
we're made A general charge Of
cheating or of gross cheat. bv false
pretences. is no. enough. "No per-
son shall be held to answer for an,
crime or offence II Is unIess unor
Indictment fully and plainlv describ
inu such crime or offence .; ART :
C0nst The acts must he described
in order that the Court las well as
the Drosecutorl NAV saw whethe,
thev are false nretences. or n oros.
cheat. and also in order that person,
accused NAV he informed what act,
are charged AGAINST ihem ,s crimes
and NAV he advised of their Ieco
defence if anv. and NAV instruc
counsel as to the evidence lif anv) t,
contradict the CHARGE State VS.
Parker. 43 N. Fl. IS; Com, VS.
Dean. 116 Mass. 259. Com. VS.
Wallace. 16. GRAY 223.
The statute also requires that tn
false pretences he "desionedlv'
used. the first count fails to ave
this.
A gross cheatby obtaining by falls
pretences anv money or thino O
value is NOT shown bv nreventin,
the Government from 1etting reve
nue..
(2l-Tbere is no such stotutor
or common law offence as cheatinI
the Hawaiian Government. Al
offences AGAINST the Government o
the revenues are creatures of stat