The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1888-03-20
BEFORE THE EULL COURT.
IN RE 4. KALAI, POLICE JUSTICE
OF NORTH KoHALA, HAWAII.
og1.ign q D. coo.l PEI yrDD. c. J.

The respondent Z. Kalai, Esq,
who is Police Justice of North Ko-
hala, Hawaii, having first received
his appointment to that Office on the
lst October, 1884, was complained
of by the Attorney General accord
ing to the provisions of Section GA
of the Civil Code as amended by the
Act of 1866, and he was regularly
cited to appear and answer the
charges.
The complaint alleges substan-
TALLY, as good cause for his removal
from office, that pending the trial of
one NJ r. Freitas in Respondents
Court, on the charge of selling
spirituous liquors without a license,
it was agreed between said Freitas
and respondent that in considera-
ton of q bribe in money to be paid
by Freitas to respondent, the latter
would acquit him of the charge; that
on the 9TH November last, respon-
dent did acquit Freitas and receive
from him on the next day the sum
of 5000. The complaint contains
also general charge that respon-
dent is VIGOROUSLY dishonest, cor
rupt and unreliable in the discharge
of his judicial functions and Totally
unfit to hold a judicial office.
Upon careful Investigation of
the evidence we find the substantial
facts to be that very shortly previous
to the 31St October last, the day
when Freitas was arrested upon the
warrant charging him with selling
spirituOus liquors without Il license,
the Judge had borrowed of him,
| to be repaid in a fortnight without
/ interest, Freitas having only been
/ in business in Kohala as a store
keeper some two months and being
a comparative stranger to the Justice
who, though being quite extensively
engaged in business had had no
previous dealings with this man, not
being regular customer of his, only
having bought 81 worth of goods
| from him.
On the evening of the day of his
arrest, Freitas, not being acquainted
with the Hawaiian language, took
one Francisco Cano who speaks Ha-
waiian well, with him and went to
the Judges house, visiting the
Deputy Sheriff ON the way. Cano
acted as Interpreter between Freitas
and the Judge and says that Freitas
asked the Judge through him for
advice as to what he had best do,
that he had sold no liquor as the
Judge well knew, and finally said if
the Judge would help him he would
give him $50, to which the Judge
nodded an assent and said he must
put his defence on by witnesses.
They found the Judge lying on a
mat in his bedroom, reading, and
Freitas and Cano sat near the door,
and Cano finally sat down on the
mat. When the conversation was fin
ished the Judge and Freitas went out
on to the verandah alone and Cano
heard the chink of money, his in
ference being that coin passed be-
tween them. The trial began on the
3D. November, and the Court heard
the three witnesses for the proseeu-
ton and four of the witnesses for
the defence and took an adjourn
ment to the eth. That evening
Freitas' son and bookkeeper went
with Cano to the Judges house at
about 8 o'clock and told the Judge,
as they had told the Deputy Sheriff
on the way ever, that the witnesses
for the prosecution owed Freitas
debts at the store and wanted to get
out OF them by prosecuting him on a
false charge. The Judge said if you
have good evidence it will be all
right, and you bring your account
books and if they show what you
say, have them in Court.
On the way to Court on the 9TH,
the Judge told Freitas' attorney to
stop in and get the books of account
TO be used as evidence. The Judge
heard the rest of the evidence and
acquitted Freitas, saying, among
other things, that the books showed
that the witnesses for the prosecu-
ton were debtors of Freitas. The
Judges explanation is this: 1t was
common defence to storekeeper's
bills that they were really for liquor,
which could not legally be collected.
The next day the Judge asked for a
loan OF $50 from Freitas and it was
made TO him on the 9th, Freitas
taking it to him at his house and the