The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1891-10-15
SUPREME COURT.
WEDNESDAY, Oct. IA.
LAW DIVIsION-BEFORE JUDD.

WEDNESDAY, Oct. IA.
La" DIVIsIoN-BEFoRE JUDD, CD
bankruptcy of John Cook. Petitioner
Is aoludged bankrupt on his own peti-
tion' and October Goth is appointed for
proof OF claims and election of assignee.
W. u. Smith, attorney for petitioner.
PROBATE DIvIsIoN-BEFoRE DOLE, j.
In re estate of Emily Baldwin At
water. Petition for probate of will. The
court ordered that letters testamentarv
De issued TO W. 0. Smith without bond.
w. y. Smith for petitioner.
OCTOBER TERM.
Robert Parker, who was called for the
prosecution in rebuttal in the Queen VS..
VIM. Hoopii. sworH, testified that he
acted as interpreter iii the Marshal's
office when Hoopii was questioned by
Capt. Hopkins, and that Hoopii then
stat q to Capt. Hopkins that he had two
white men as accomplices. When the
examination was through, Capt Parker
conducted Hoopii to his cell, and on the
way said Is it true what you told Capt.
Hopkins, that two white men were inn
plicated with you, Hoopii ?'' Hoopii re-
piled, No, it is not" " What did you
say so for then? q thought they
would be more ienient with me if | said
that"
Hoopii was sentenced to four years
Imprisonment at hard labor.
The Queen VS.. Kaahuna and Kelii-
kuewa. Maintaining lottery. Found
guilty, and fined $500 each. Appea! from
Police Court. Sentence confirmed. De-
putty Marshal Wilder for prosecution !;
Nawahi for defendants.
The Queen VS.. Kaaemoku and Keikai-
kai. Practicing medicine without
license. The jury acquitted the defend
ants, two dissenting. Makahalupa for
defendant; Kaulukou for prosecution.
Hawaiian jury cases will be finished
this week. Cases SO and 60, foreign jury,
will be tried upstairs this week. Next
week the foreign jury will sit down
stairs and the mixed jury upstairs, be-
ginning with case As.
CRIMINAL DIvIsION-BEFORE BICKERTON, j.
The Queen VS.. Yung Quai. Assault
and battery. Foreign jury. The case
occupied the whole day and was con-
tinued until this morning.
In Reg. VS.. Aseu. Further argument
was made before Mr.. Justice Dole
SCStClOdy cl the quSSUlOll VI law WuStuSI
| the alleged false representations made in
| China by the defendant and his agents,
as to the wages which the laborers could
| get in Hawaii, constitute the offense OF
false pretenses under our statute.
Mr.. Hartwell, for the prosecution,
frankly admitted that the proofs did not
carry out the position, as he was in
structed, namely, that the misrepresen-
tations were not only made in China, but
also that the contracts were not fully
translated and explained to the laborers
on board the Pactolus at Hawaii; but he
| claimed that if there were misrepresen-
tations made in China and concealment
of the requirements of the law of 1890, it
was false pretense as to existing condi-
tons and circumstances in Hawaii,
which was consummated by obtaining
| the contracts under the circumstances
| shown by the evidence.
| Mr.. Hatch claimed that all that was
shown by the prosecution was promise,
an assurance of future benefits, and that
on that evidence the offense charged
could not be shown.
The Court took the question under adj
| visement.