The Hawaiian gazette., 1889-10-29
SUPREME COURT.
oCnoRER TERN.


addressed him.
The Cou-t-"'It appears that he lost
courrol of himself yesterday and the At
10rnev-General Suggests that he be nned
Or punished Tor contempt OF Court. 1t
zas certainly very improper conduct,
VOC made yourself 3 paruzan, and the
language YOU used was very improper,
hur the Court = never disposed TO be
severe with the people that are perhaps
nOt cute aware Of the decorum they
should always preserve. We feel called
mon however 10 dismiss YOU from fur
-fe- attendance IN this court as a Juror
and vou- name NAV be taken from the
7u-T Iist"
NJ. Ross, counsel for Wilcox pre-
scented 3 motion that his client be ad-
-ni--e5 70 bail. His Honor set the hour
for hearing Of argument on the motion
- g 50 o'clock Friday morning.
Case Nc I. the King vs.. Poai and
eighteen Others. charged with mutinv
zzs nov called The Chief Justice be-
M 3 stakeholder in the Wilder's Steam
snip Co. Owners OF the vessel Kinau,
On which the mutiny occurred) regarded
himself disqualified iron sitting
on the trial OF this case and
he retired. Judge McCully occupying the
JUDICIAL char. The defendants
eighteen IN number were all
.S-rsiCnei but before plea was taken the
Arco-nev-Generalp presented a certificate
70 the Cont declining 10 present an in
Gic1men5 against Poai, Jim Crow,
Aeh4i. keawe, Palau, Pimkohola, koho-
lolis. lama. Alama, solomon, halama,
NElua, L5oka heawe. and Joe kaaha-
uui ana they were discharged. The
indictment was then read against the
remaining defendants and they pleaded
noe cuiltv. 4 Hawaiian Jury was then
1rSEn and sworn In by Clerk Henry
>mlfh- The prosecution was conducted
dy Deputy Ajtomey-Seneral Peterson
and Mr.. Name appeared Tor defendants.
81 the evidence q Captain Lorenzen,
Parser BecSley and MeSSrS, Brewster
aid E5lbGS, tse prosecution presented
tllst on tlse 2oth os last June. on a Voy-
ace Il tse coSStiDs steamer hlnau fuom
ttllS po-t 10 WioiwSu3, that the men
chzccei, VIZ hanamu, hame6a and
Achi, Wlth others, became dlSorierly
s,esore reaching the spar buoy after le2v-
s1c H00o.Clc. on SccouDt ii an assault
committed lav the mate On one OF their
oGnte-. and they attempted 10 force the
61schSrce. by the captain, Of his first
O-ficer * L.Shalua, They continued very
GiSooserly, and On arrival at Eahaina
their demand not being acceded TO they
refused duty. POrSer Beckley being I'M
able fo- s while 10 obtain boats TO carry
freSc6t and passengers 10 shore. Sheriff
Evans q I-2h&ina was notified and the
1ctinous sailors were arrested by him
and finally sent 10 Honolulu Tor trial.
The defence offered the evidence of
seven witnesses, the gist of which cor
robo-ated the charge OF the prosecution
n 50 much that the men had demanded
the captain 10 discharge the first officer,
and had struck work in consequence of
the retention by the captain of the
offending mate.
Mr. Kane. for the defense, addressed
the Jury al p. m, followed by Deputy
Acknowledgement Peterson at 3:l5. At
tie close Of Mr.. Peterson's remarks
Judge McCul!y charged the jury as fol-
lows
Gentlemen: There is a wide and
serious difference in the relations of
hired men on sea and on the land. On
Shipbo2rd the captain Is the absolute
master as lao employer of labor on shore
Is. You see the necessity of it, a ship
cannot be run by committee, and
ship cannot be run by the agreement
and counsel of the sailors and all hands.
The captain is not obliged to ask his men
and TO advise with his men as to what
should De done on shipboard, and that is
too plain 10 need any further remark.
Even q passenger on shipboard is under
Z different rule from the same man on
shore in relation to travelling anywhere.
Even a passenger interfering with the
working OF the ship could, by authority
Of the captain, be prevented, if neces-
sSry, by locking him up, ironing him, if
need be.
Now, has sailor no rights because he
Is q sailor, if he is abused, injured in
any way2 Take the case of Poai, and
take the case to be that the mate in
tiicted an assault upon him that was
brutal in It's character and unnecessary
and not justified by law, or by the usages
OF the sea; take that case, he would
have right on coming to port TO cause
the mate 10 be prosecuted for assault and
battery, he would have right to bring a
civil action against him and recover
damages IN money; and, thirdly, he
could bring an action under which his
contract for service would be dissolved fit |
were shown that he was maltreated; but
there Is no right on the part of his snip
mates to conspire together to secure him
justice from the captain, while on their
voyage.
Now the whole defense of these defen-
dants is that they did have such right.
II is true they offered testimony to show
that the assault of the mate upon Poai |
was unwarrantable, but that as the At
torney-G General has said to you is not |
strictly proper to this case. Right or
wrong the crew had no right to MAKE |
the demand for a "hooponopono, a
settlement Well now, what was |
this settlement that they demand |
ed? 1t was just this; by their |
own testimony it was a settlement |
according to their terms. TO discharge !
the mate, otherwise they would not do |
duty. Their counsel tells you that they |
went 10 the captain of the ship as the |
'makua" or the father and head of
them all, in order to have their wrongs |
rigbted; but in truth according to their
own statements, which you must take |
against them, they went to him to make
q demand that it should be settled in |
their way They were taking the au-
thority of the ship into their own hands. |
II they could demand this they could |
demand other things. l charge you
therefore, strictly, not to take up this
theory that they went merely and pro-
parlv 10 the captain, as the "makua" of
the crew, for him to settle, but they
want there with a demand that he set