The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1890-08-13

Rep. Brown-The object Of this Act is
TO mitigate the severity OF the present
law. 1t is generally thought that the
enactment OF 1886 was too sweeping,
since il covers compartments which
might be constituted without the knowl-
edge of the captain or mates Circum-
stances surrounding every case would |
determine whether the master had |
knowledge of the smuggling. l think |
with the amendment which the commit |
tee propose the bill should pass.
Noble Widemann- Let the member
from Wailuku imagine himself captain. |
| am a sailor and put aboard say 100 tons |
OF opium. The opium is found, but | am
not found. How would the hon. mem
Der like to be locked up for my act? The
ordinary rule is that guilt must be
proved. The present law tries to get
around that and punish man against
whom nothing can be proved. 1t is our
misfortune that we put premium on
smuggling. 1t is this which makes the
present law odious. Dir. President, it is
not true that the bulk of our captains
and masters here smuggle. 1t Is ridicu-
lous to suppose that ships and steamers
are sent here TO smuggle hundred tins
of opium. A hundred should not be
punished for the deed of one. | am not
a shipowner nor captain and L never ex-
pect to be either. | was asked to bring
this bill into this House. Thinking it is
a good bill, bill to relieve the innocent,
am ready to support it. On the second
reading it went to the Committee on
Commerce and they recommend put
ting in the captain. A good amend
ment. might possibly have added the
Ct oHoo- h,t T ac,,l1 not roato tho
owner.
Minister Peterson-The argument for
this bill is that the present law may
work hardship. So it may, but there are
many laws of this kind. The Marshal is
responsible for the acts OF his deputies,
no matter though he may be miles away.
| He appoints them, has control of them
and the principle of the Civil Law makes
him answerable in damages for their
acts. The hon. noble has coachman,
| perhaps, who drives him down town.
| The coachman runs into another car
riage and smashes it. The hon. noble is
responsible. To carry out the argument
used, he should not be responsible for
| the acts of his servant. 1t may be an
swered that that is civil responsibility,
not criminal. But so is the response
bility under our present opium law. 1t
does not provide that an owner may be
arrested. | think this bill will work well
if it is passed. 1t will remove safeguards
and make smuggling easier than it is
now. With regard to the hardships
under the present law. There have been
only two seizures under the present law
Both were settled by the Minister OF
Finance for fne-a fine perhaps nc
larger than would have been charged il
the cases had gone into Court under the
ordinary law. The law has, as matter
of fact, worked no hardship. Why should
we assume that it will do so in future
To stop the smuggling some one must be
held responsible, and think we should
follow the well established principle thai
the owner is responsible for the acts o
his servant.
Noble Widemann-I have no objection
to the general principle OF law laid down
But would ask the Attorney General i
he is responsible for the acts of the Mar
shall. (Attorney-General-1 In a certain
way, yes.) In dollars and cents? Tha
is a case where they have been very
careful not to apply the principle.
know nothing more ridiculous than tn,
present law which by tabooing opium
makes it cheap.
Rep. Robt. Wilcox am in favor o
! this BILL 1t is brought in to protect in
nocent owners of ships. Take the Gee
anic steamers. Suppose steward O
someone else brings in a few tins o
opium. Under the present law the shil
is liable. hope the bill will pass to b
engrossed.
Rep. White If this bill passes, thos
now in the opium business will b.
ruined, as so much will be brought il
that the price will GO down to 80 C.
tin. The result will be big dividends t.
be divided between the captain, tn
owners and sailors. In the case of tn
Bryant thirty pounds were found in
compartment. 1t could not have beer
there without the knowledge of the cap
tain. The owners of the Consuelo got Of
through some Observation-Disclosures tn
smartness of their lawyer, not becaus
they were innocent. | move the prev
Gus question, and that the ayes and noe
be called.
Both motions were carried.
The bill was indefinitely postponed b.
the following vote:
Ayes Cummins, G. Brown, Peterson
Kauhane, j. M. Horner, w. Y. Horner
Anderson, Kanoa, Cummings, Kauhi
: Nawahi, Baker, A. Horner, KahookanC
i, Waipuilani, Apiki, Paehaole, White
!. Kanealii, Kalua, Halstead, Kamai. knud
sen and Rice-24.
!, Noes-Widemann, Berger, Macfarlane
Muller, Pua, Mccarthy, Phillips, Crabbe
!. Hind, Burchardt, G. N. Wilcox, Isen
. berg, G. Brown, Marques, Lucas, r. Wi
cox, Richard, and A. S. Wilcox-1S.
|, The House took recess.