The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1888-03-23
THE CONSPIRACY CASES.
G. w. MRcfarlane and w. 3. Luce
Committed for Trial.


Chief Justice Judd, who stated that
Jurisdiction in these matters was con-
ferred upon him concurrently with Dis
trict Justices, and quoted the section of
the Civil Code under which he acted in
his present capacity. He did not under
stand that he must be convinced beyond
all reasonable doubt that an offense had
been committed by defendants in order
to be justified in committing them for
trial. The corpus deficit must be
demonstrated, though it need not be
proved to his satisfaction that defendant
is the party who has committed the Of
tense. A jury required more evidence
that a committing magistrate The
committing magistrate must, however,
be satisfied, first, as to the facts, and
second that they constitute an offense.
He defined conspiracy, which was the
concerning together of two or more to
commit an offense under the Code and
an offense under the Code was whatever
the penal law forbids to be done. That
being the case, he supposed that any
statutory offense which it was the object
OF the conspiracy to commit must be
shown as being the object of the con-
spiracy. He referred to chapter of the
Laws of 1886, section 8: "Any person
who shall in any way be knowingly con-
cerned in carrying, removing, depositing
or cOncealing, or in any manner dealing
with X any dutiable goods upon
which no duties have been paid" etc.
That might be the offense which the
facts before him described as being the
object of the conspiracy. Or it might
come under the designation of gross
| cheat. In Luce's case he found that de-
PENDANT had agreed with Hayley to OBJ
| tain Canavarro's order to the amount of
| $500 Canavarro had no dealings with
Luce and nothing was charged against
him An order in blank was procured
| and Luce filled in the list with his own
goods, or goods to which he had right
| by some contract with the importer,
upon which the duty would be $500. He
| took that order to the Custom House
and procured the goods, put them into
his store and credited Hayley with $500.
| His Honor took it for granted that the
goods which this $500 was to liquidate
were sold for prices which included the
duty, as we'll as the original cost, freight
and other charges and profit. And if SO
Hayley's debt was paid by duties which
| the law allows to be RENTED to Cana
varro upon goods for his own use, but
the law does not allow him that privi-
lege upon goods for any other purpose.
The agreement to do that was
mutual undertaking to do what was
an offense. 1t was "directly in
furious to another" viz, the Gov
eminent, or the people, who were de-
prived of their right to the revenue &C
cruing from these duties. According to
another view, it was obtaining a remis-
sion of duties upon dutiable goods Turn
ing to Macfarlane's case, he found that
| liquors were sold by Macfarlane's firm to
Hayselden for 81 ,749 50. They were
sold at prices which included the duty
upon then, and they were charged to
Hayselden. They must have paid a
sum which included the duty, otherwise
the Government would have lost the
duty twice Hayselden, being pressed
| by defendant for payment, gave him the
Kings orders for the amount, and they
were placed to his credit Three lists were
made out and the Kings order attached.
The spirits, ETC., were taken out, the
duties on which amounted to 81, 749 80.
| The amount charged against Hayselden
was placed to the credit of this account.
The Kings order paid, not only the du-
| ties, but the price of the liquors, which
is not authorized by law. If the King
ordered the goods in the first instance
the price was illegally paid. A con-
spiracy is a combination to commit an
offense, as doing or emitting to do what
the penal law requires. The law re-
quires the duty to be paid. 1t was
making an unlawful use OF
the Kings orders. His Honor did
not consider it proper to discuss the
, question further. A fuller deliberation
might be prejudicial to defendants If he
fortified the present brief argument. 1t
was simply the opinion of one man.
The defendants were then separately
committed for trial by jury at the April
term, bail being fixed at $4,000 each.
The bondsmen for Macfarlane are S. M.
Damon and A. j. Cartwright, Sr.; for
Luce, M. D. Monsarrat and l.. j. Levey.
| TO THE PRESS.
After having committed the defend
ants, His Honor addressed a few words
to the members of the press. He said
that if any impression had gone out