The Hawaiian gazette., 1891-09-08
OPINION oF rHR counr PSF JuDD, c. J,

law that SOch was MS opinlot
OPINION os rHR COURT PER JUDD, c. J.
An indictment charging the de-
fendsnt With an assault with q
weapon obviously ard imminently
dangerous to life upon one Chin
Young on the Sth April, 1891, IN
Honolulu, Island of Oahu, was pre-
scented against him, the defendant,
on the first day of the term. The
indictment was signed by the Attor-
ney- General and true bin found
by Mr.. Justice Dole presiding at the
term. The defendant demurred to
the jurisdiction and submits that
s'the Court had and has no right to
find true bill against the defen-
dant herein, for the reason that the
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to
entertain this cause does not appear
upon the records or files herein nor
does it appear that the offense
stated in said Indictment is of a
character or quality such as gives
this Court authority to hear or try
the defendant upon said charge"
The plea was overruled and excep-
tions taken and brought to this
Court.
By the Penal Code. Section s OF
Chapter TX, the offense of assault or
assault and battery with knife,
sword cane or other weapon obvi
ously dangerous to life is punish
able by fine not exceeding $500 and
Imprisonment at hard labor not ex-
ceediDg five years By Chapter LII.
of the Penal Code the Police Court
and District Courts have jurisdic-
ton for the prosecution. trial and
sentence to punishment of any per-
son charged, inter ala, with "any as
sault and battery coming under the
9th section of the 9Th chapter of the
Penal Code"
1t follows that the Supreme Court
had by the general law jurisdiction
of the case. The requisites of the
law as to commitment. presentation
of indictment to the presiding Judge
and his finding q true bill have been
complied with.
Certain Acts of the Legislature, to
wit, of 1870, 1850 and 1882, confer
upon the Police and District Courts
concurrent jurisdiction with the SUI
preme and Circuit Courts of all
cases of assault with knives, sword
canes and other weapons obviously
dangerous to life. and IN cases where
the offense is not of highly aggra-
waited character the Police and Dis
trict Courts may punish the offender
by a fine not exceeding two hun
dred dollars and by imprisonment
at hard labor not exceeding two
yeart, but In cases where such pun
ishment would be inadequate, the
offender shall be committed for trial
according to existing provisions OF
law.
1t is thus made optional with the
lower courts either to take jurisdic-
ton and proceed to Judgment if it
finds the offense to be not highly
aggravated character or to commit
forthwith if it finds the offense to be
Of such character that the punish
ment i. is authorized to infict would
be inadequate. In this case the
magistrate has committed for trial.
He has declined to entertain sum-
mary jurisdiction. There arises
then, conclusive presumption of
law that the magistrate has found
the case to be of such nature that
a sentence Of two hundred dollars !
fine and two years Imprisonment at |
hard labor would be inadequate pun
ishment
1t is not necessary that he should |
have so certified in his transcript of .
the evidence upon which the com /
mitment is founded, which he is re-
quired to send to the Attorney Gen /
eral This transcript has been re-
pestedly held to be no part of the
record IN the Court to which the
commitment is made
1t must be Borne In mind that the
Supreme and Circuit Courts have
criminal jurisdiction coex-
tensive with the jurisdictions for
which they are created, and the legis-
lstion in regard TO assaults with
deadly weapons has not taken this
away, but has conferred
! concurrent Jurisdiction over them
1pon the lover Courts where the as
'eult Is Lot Of highly aggravated
character.
See NslGe '. Kuau, 4th Haw.. 257.
It Is not essential that 1t appear i
q the indictment that the accused /
las been committed for trial. This
S q matter for the presiding Justice 1
When examining the Indictment pre- {
euted to hin for allowance
II it sh0nld appear on the trial of
be indictment that The offense was {
lot OF q highly aggravated character
nd that the Police Justice might I
veil have taken summary iurisdic- {
ion OF it, this would rot Gust the
supreme Court OF its concurrent
In such case the de-
eDdant would not be prejudiced- for
ne presiding Justice. In the exercise
t his discretion over the punish s
nent, would be authorized to impose