The Hawaiian gazette., 1888-05-01

count OF the luulCtulCllll, winch was
done, with the following result:
Guilty.. f.. Bidwell A. Petrie, A.
Morotf, w. w. Wright, III. Mackin-
tosh, w. c. King, NJ. n. Sanders, J.
\. Kennedy, +. Turrill-9,
Not guilty-Wm. Roland, A. n.
Trip, l.. G.. Schumann-S.
Mr.. Neuniann noted exceptions. TO
the verdict, and moved for a new trial.
His Honor discharged the jury from
further attendance, and the Court adj
jouned till 10 o'clock.
On the Court openingat 10 o'clock
the Acknowledgement moved for sen
tence upon the defendant,
Mr. Hatch filed motion in arrest
of judgment for the following rea-
sons;
l. That the third count in the in
dictment on which the defendant was
found guilty is not sufficient in law.
,. That the verdict of the jury was
contrary to law and evidence.
3. For misconduct of the jury.
l. For irregularity in the empan-
cling of the jury.
). For newly discovered evidence
Which motion the Court overruled
Mr.. Hatch then argued, as reasons
for a lenient sentence, that whereas
the conspiracy statute makes the
offense of conspiring to receive
dutiable goods without payment of
duty, punishable by Imprisonment
up to two years. or by fine up to
$500, yet the statute of 1856 imposes
no penalty of Imprisonment for the
otfense of so removing such goods,
without the payment of duty 1t
would thus seem hard to punish a
conspiracy to commit an Offense by
imprisonment, when. had the offense
itself been committed, only pecu-
MARY fine could be imposed as a
penalty for such otfense Therefore,
in this case, counsel argued, the
Court being invested with a discre-
ton of the matter, no Imprisonment,
but only a fine should be imposed.
The Acknowledgement stated to the
Court that the object of the Govern
ment in bringing these prosecutions
against Messrs. Macfarlane and Luce
had been, not to secure the imprison-
ment of the defendants, but desire
to obtain an authoritative legal con
struct;on of the statutes involved, to
learn whether, as a matter of law, the
acts of the defendants constituted 4
violation OF those statutes, and if it
should be found that they had so
violated the statutes, that these pros
ecutions might serve as a lettering
influence upon the rest of the com
munity, while at the same time vindi-
eating the law which had been
broken. With respect to the defen-
dant at the bar, he felt that the YER
diet of the jury, under the instruc-
tions as given by the Court, had
furnished a complete justification of
the course and purpose of the Gov
eminent, and a sufficient vindication
of the law so that no Imprisonment
of the defendant was necessary to
complete such vindication There
was no desire on the part of the Gov
eminent, or of the speaker person
ally, to see defendant imprisoned.
While it was true that the wide ex
tant of similar or kindred transac-
lions in the community during years
past did not excuse nor even extenu-
ate the position and course of the
defendant, yet it might well be con
sidered as a mitigating circumstance
in the matter of sentence. He
thought, while deferring to the Court,
with whom and in whose discretion
the severity or leniency of the SEN
tence rested, that it might well be
considered harsh and unfair that de-
PENDANT should be imprisoned upon
this, the first conviction of the kind
in this country. He would, therefore,
respectfully suggest that the infic-
ton Of a peeuniary fine would meet
all the purposes of justice, in this
case, and would request that, in
passing sentence, no Imprisonment
be inflicted, but that the Court do
confne itself to the inhiction of fine.
THE SENTENCE.
Judge Dole calling on the de fen
dant to come forward passed sen
tence upon him IN the following
terms:
You are found guilty of the offense
of conspiracy in the second degree.
The law authorizes the infiction of
Imprisonment at hard labor for not
more than two years, or a fine of
not more than two hundred dollars
as the penalty.
Among other defenses your coun-
sci urged that the removal Of goods
from the Custom House without
paying duties thereon, by means of
orders of parties who are by statute
exempt from paying duties upon
goods, is and has been common
practice in this community There
is strong reason from the evidence
in this case, and the case Of the
King vs.. Luce, to believe that for
some time past, until lately, some of
the highest officers In the Govern
ment have not only openly conten-
anced such transactions and made
it easy to carry them out, but have
been themselves parties to them.
But this fact is no defense to any
offense against the laws of the
country. l am inclined. however. to