The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-08-19

the writ in this law since
to confer such jurisdiction upon the Judges Civ l. See
1917.
On behalf Of the petitioner conende first that the
ute CIV L. Sec. 300 under which he convicted is in
hict with the first part of Article Of the Constitution lch
provides that Each law shall embrace but subject which
shall be expressed in Its title, being contenled that the statute
embraces at least subjects of which only namely, va
rants and "dordey persons expressed IN the title.
The section 800 under part "Chapter
37 entitled 'Vagrants-D
which is compilation enacted though far
1T correctly forth the law judicial pro
ceedngs without reference the original law Laws of
1898 1t is Sec l. amended of the chapter of the
Der and title of the Penal by
Act SO Of the Laws of 1896 entitled chapter
XXXVII of the Penal relating Migrants dsolery
persons and repeating Chapter III of the session laws Of 1916,
and Chapter XII of the relative thereto'
The title of this amendatory object
amend Chapter XXXVII of the Penal Code relating
and dlsordery and that object expressed in its title
And to the title of Chapter XXXVI itself of the Penal Code
Article 60 of the Constitution does apply that because that
chapter is not distinct law by itself and has title within the
meaning of the constitutional provision. It is but portion of
the Penal Code, which comprehensive law the title of which
is broad enough embrace the subjects covered by Chapter
NXXVII and its amendments. See Republic Parsons, 10
Iaw COL and there cited 1t will therefore be unnecessary
to consider whether the section the law under which the pe
toner convicted embraces subjects by the
Il
the section would be if constituted separate
law by itself.
Secondly that the portion of Section $40 under which the petit
toner charged and convicted because
imposes defendants the burden of proving their innocence
This portion provides for the punishment of any person
who found by night without lawful he proof of which
shall be such person. in npon any dwelling
house,, &C. Defendant relies the Wong Hdne
1os Cal $50 In that the ordinance provided that, cit
shall be unlawful for person have in his possession unless
it be shown that such innocent for lawful
pose and lottery ticket The held that the legislature
could constuonally the presumption of
and that that portion of the which purpoed
do ineparabe from the the whole had fall The
held that the qualification proof attached the
definition of the oense and expressed the opinion that if the
ofense had been defined consisting of the possession with
criminal purpose the would have been different The
present differs from that that respect Here the alb
of lawful coupled being night
in dwellnghoue &c, part of the definition of tesoen
and the clause relating proof independent provision
which, if unconstitutional be discarded without affecting
the validity of the remainder of the law We need therefore
express opinion whether the clause relating proof
constitutional
Thirdly, that the petitioner charged
of only of the described in Section So
forth in the mttimu done in this case, that
the defendant convicted of violating Section $40 DC, which
describes large number of Sec $40 does purpo
different general offenes merely provides
that who does of number Of enumerated
acts be punished, Thus sense the defendant
guilty the mittmus, violating He
violated it in respects for he charged with having
med of the enumerated and found guilty cla1
ed the different enumerated constituted differ
nt General ofense still mtimus woud
face far appears there the defendant might have been
guilty described in the There is but
one punishment prescribed alleged defect
It'll defect mmls made appear only by reference
it appears precisely what the defendant found guilty of and
record but the reference made the record
jurisdiction of the oens charged and
der the particular Judgment In Rhodes Iaw 343 IN
re Piipiani 7 IIaw 95 Ear Pate Murray, 43 Cal 455.