The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-02-25
HOUSE.
Eighth Day, February "a.

House called to order at the usual
illness.
The Attorney-General addressed to
the Speaker the following:
81 reply to the question propounded
by the member from the 4th District,
A V Gear, by what authority or
statute do sheriffs and other officers
exercise the power of allowing or dis
allowing warrants of arrest to issue
by endorsing their refusal or approval
on the same and thus exercising the
functions of judicial officers I would
state:
'HThe Attorney-General, the Marshal
and his subordinate officers are charg
ed with the duty of enforcing the law.
"The Attorney-General and the Of
ficers authorized by him or by statute
to represent the prosecution in criminal
cases before the courts are charged
with the duty of presenting and carry
ing on criminal prosecutions. Those
who have the authority to represent
the Government in criminal cases
brought before the courts have the
authority to refuse to bring such pro-
ceedings or to enter a nolle prosequi.
1.-The control of criminal prosecu-
tions is in the Department of the At
torney General. After criminal pro-
secution has once been begun and evil
dence taken before the court, the court
has jurisdiction in the matter of GER
tain of the proceedings thereafter can
only be taken with the approval of
the court.
"The rule of custom which has been
adopted of requiring the approval of
the prosecuting officer before the mag
istrate issues his warrant of arrest is
not a statutory provision but an I'M
dertanding which, has been in force
for many years. 1t is due the officer
representing the prosecution in any
district to have knowledge of criminal
cases which are to be brought before
the court and it is of assistance to the
magistrate to have warrants of arrest
approved by this officer before they
are issued.
mo magistrate should issue war
rant of arrest without being first sat
isfied that there is reasonable ground
to believe that the party accused is
guilty. 1t is not his duty to try to pre-
judge the case before it is regularly
brought before him, but he must be
satisfied that there is reasonable
ground for the prosecution. The OBJ
servance of the custom referred to of
requiring the approval is of assistance
to the magistrate in this respect.
while the pratice referred to has
been observed for many years, it has
icti I'D in
that the magistrate is not obliged to
wait for this approval before issuing
his warrant.
Before this custom or practice was
adopted, it not infrequently happened
that persones under temporary excite
ment would apply for the issue of a
warrant and, upon subsequent investi-
CATION it would be found that there
was no merit in the case at all. In this
way parties were subjected to great in
convenience and injustice and unneces-
sary expense was incurred.
I'm conclusion, / would state that
| the custom referred to is not one to be
arbitrarily exercised, but experience
| has proven that when it is reasonably
| enforced it results to the benefit of the
committee"
Referring to this matter, Representa-
| tive Robertson spoke in part as fol-
| lows: THE law gives every person who
| believes an offense has been committed
| the right to make complaint to the
District Magistrate and to obtain from
him under sworn statement, a war
rant. A practice had grown up requir-
| ing the approval of the Marshal his
deputy or deputies, in the other dis
tricts and, unless the warrant be o.
KID by the prosecuting officer, the Dis
| trict Magistrate refuses to sign, fur
Their than in this he goes beyond the
| law and, l submit, further than is
proper. I protest against this practice
which, the Attorney General himself,
admits has grown up. 1t is time it was
stopped"
| Representative Loebenstein protest
ed on behalf of the people and from
his place against the practice of the
signing of warrants by the Sheriff or
Deputy Sheriff.