The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1893-07-31


sovereign. And this was proper as
criminal prosecutions were by the
Crown which represented the State.
On the change of Government IN
January last, this Court ordered the
processes of Court to be entitled lin
the name of the Provisional Govern
ment of the Hawaiian Islands"
which was equally proper as indi-
eating the authority for instituting
criminal prosecutions. In republic
the proper form would be 'In the
name of the people of the --"
naming the State.
Fourth. The demurrer alleges that
''the indictment does not with suffici-
ent certainty designate and identify
any person whom this defendant is
therein alleged to have killed and
murdered" The indictment charges
that defendant did kill and murder
one d. l.. Huntsman," and it is con-
tended by defendants counsel that
this Is fatal defect-that to describe
the person assailed not by his Chris
tan name but by Initials and sur
name is insufficient. The early Eng
lish cases to which we are referred,
show that the letter of the alphabet
which is vowel may be the name of
a person, and there is contrariety in
the cases upon the question whether
one of these letters which IS a conso-
nant can constitute a name. In
Tweedy VS.. Jarvis, n Conn, AZ, the
Court held that a consonant may be
presumed to be an entire Christian
oh
however, of naming the deceased In
an indictment of this character is to
identity him and to admit proof that
the person killed was the one named
in the indictment. AS Wharton, in
his Grim. Evidence, Sec. SO, says,
"The real question is, what did the
defendant call himself, and permit
himself to be called? By this name
he is to be indicted. If he calls him
self by initials and signs his name
by initials, by initials he may be
described in an Indictment" Wander
mark ct al. vs.. the People, AZ ILL.,, 722,
sustains this view. The Court say,
at is said that the full Christian
name of the prosecuting witness
should have been given, and that the
initials were not sufficient. 1t IS a
rule of pleading that the name of
the person receiving the injury, when
known, must be set ont in the indict
ment, that the accused may know of
what particular offense he is charged.
But when the person is described by
the initials of his Christian name,
and he is as we'll known by that as
his full name, the object of the rule is
obtained and no error is committed.
And it was a question for the jury
whether he was known in the com
munity as well by that as his full
name"
There are many cases which take
the ground that an indictment
against man by the initials of his
christian name only is subject to
plea in abatement, unless the grand
jury add that his name is unknown
to them otherwise than is set out.
U. S. VS.. Upham, 43 Fed, r. 6S /;
Zellers vs.. the State, z Ind, $50. In
this last case as well as in many
others the Courts say that every
person is presumed to have chris
tan name and this seems to be
the foundation for the rule that it
should be set out in full. But in
this country with q population con
sisting of many different races, many
of whom are not Christian, and who
therefore do not have christian
names, and with an aboriginal popu
lation among whom the adoption of
christian names is of but recent
origin and not universal, it cannot
be truthfully said that such presump
ton exists. We are unwilling to
take the extreme view that an indict-
ment for murder is demurrable be
cause the name of the person killed
was not set ont in full, but by initials
only.
In Wade VS.. State, 4 S. W. Rep,
500, a person was convicted Of the
murder of "Smutty my darling"
The Court say, "If the name Of the
deceased, as alleged in the indict-
ment, was the name of human
being, and it was this identical hui
man being that was killed, it can
make no difference that the name is
an unusual one" The statement of
the later law upon this subject we
take from 16 Amer. & Eng. Encyclop.
Law, p. 116. When a party or third
person is designated in pleading,
warrant or indictment by surname
preceded by one or more capital
letters only, the Court, in the absence
of evidence, will not presume that he
has any christian name other than
such letter or letters" We do not
understand that there was any proof
shown to the jury that the person
killed was known by the community
or denominated by himself by any
other name than that by which he
was described in the indictment, to
wit, Sd. l.. Huntsman." The only
evidence on this point being that in
an application for letters of deniza-
ton he is described as Dow Lee
Huntsman, but to this deceased
signed his name as sd. l.. Hunts
man."
Fifth. The indictment is alleged
to be Objectionable, on the ground of
duplicity, in that it purports to set
out several offenses Of different
character and degree and as having
been committed on different dates,
and coptravenes the form of the
statute in such case made and pro
vided."