The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1888-04-28

heard all testified with regard to this
| transaction. l had just general knowl-
edge that such transactions were go
ing on, upon instructions from the King
to Henry Macfarlane. My knowledge
was more from deliveries. Personally
| had nothing to do with it. l had moth
ing to do with the account, it was settled
by the clerks and Henry. l was out of
the country. l knew of the settlement
upon my return from England. l was
absent ten or eleven months. [ left here
| September 1, 1886, and returned October
| 9Th, 1886. Left again October 18th and
returned November 18th. Left again
November 18th and went to England be
ing away ten or eleven months. | never
made any agreement with Hayselden
about this account, it was all arranged
bv my brother Henry. In August, 1886,
[ heard Hayselden and Henry discussing
the checking over of the deliveries.
Henry seemed little annoyed. 1t was
IN the office of G. w. Macfarlane & Co.
1t was the next day. | think Henry was
pressing Hayselden to give little more
time to checking. | was not on speak
ing terms with Hayselden but [ reproved
him for no attending to the matter and
made a kind of a threat to sue him.
Nothing further passed about it. During
the Legislature [ had tiff with him.
He was fighting in Spreckels interest and
we came to a collision. 1t was a bitter
fight over the loan bill Hayselden and
Gibson were working in Spreckel's inter
est. At the Hotel | met Hayselden and
he said the fight was over, you have
won, let us bury the past. He al
luded to my going away. [ have not
spoken to him much since. AT the in
tervieW with the Cabinet | said, eve"
speaking OF the firm of q. w. Macfar-
lane & Co., [ may have said 81" once or
twice. My brother had all to do with
the accounts. My brother looked to the
King for the account. Hayselden had
little or no credit With us at the time.
We should have required guarantee
from Hayselden if he required credit to
the amount of $4,000.
Cross-examined-I recollect giving ev-
idence at the examination. [ returned
from England in November, 1887. l saw
the trial balance at the end of the quar-
ter and made my remarks. | was in
Honolulu the first eight months of 1886.
do not remember locking especially at
the Kings or Hayselden's accounts dur
ing that time. l saw orders being filed
and liquors sent to luaus, the bath-house
etc. L might have said the liquors may
have been for election purposes. | be-
lieye l was in Honolulu on October Dist
and April goth, 1886.
This was the case for the defense.
MIR. Neumann then addressed the Jury
for the defense. After referring to the
way IN which the Attorney General had
conducted the case, he said he blamed
him for carrying on a case against the |
defendant and keeping him in suspense |
when there was nothing against him. !
But the Attorney General had been full |
filling duty imposed upon him by the |
Legislature. The prosecution and the |
defense had got along in perfect accord. |
Now that the testimony was all in there |
could be but one conclusion, that this |
charge had not been substantiated by |
any proof. He did not think the Attor-
ney-General could ask for a conviction.
After referring to the Indictment, and
briefly reviewing the evidence, the
learned counsel thought that the iurv,
with all the evidence before it, could /
only bring in a verdict of acquittal
Crown, after thanking counsel of defense
for kind remarks, said it was positive
dlsagreeableness to have to prosecute in
this case, as the defendant held high
position in the community. He then
referred to the evidence at length, and
read an extract from charge by Judge
Dillon on conspiracy.
His Honor, in charging the Jury, said
in case OF this kind the defendant was
entltle to fair trial. A great deal of
evidence had been given that had moth
ing to do with the case. 1t was for the
jury to carefully weigh the evidence.
The question of the election gin did not
seem of such importance to him as it did
to the counsel. The question was
whether any conspiracy existed. The
first count the jury would have nothing
to do with. The second and third counts
were for them to decide upon and if thew
found the defendant guilty they could
only bring in verdict of conspiracy in
the second degree. They must give the
defendant all benefit of reasonable and
practical doubt.
At :45 O'Clock the jury retired to con-
slider their verdict.
'rHE VERDICT.
At II 40 O'Clock this morning His
Honor called the jury in when Foreman
Auil1id 0"iu tney could not agree and
stood to 4, but what for did not trans
pire. After a few remarks from His
Honor the jury retired again at II :55.
At / 90 this morning the jury were
again called in, when the following ver.
dict was rendered: 1st count, acouittal.
I'd count, disagreement Sd count
guilty I'd degree, three dissenting.
Mr. Hatch asked that the jury be
polled.
His Honor asked the Deputy Attorney
General if he had any objection.
Mr. Peterson said it was an unusual
thing, but he would not raise any OBJ
lection.
His Honor thought it an unusual
thing to be done i