The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1900-05-12
THEY ARE FREE
japanese Procurers all
Released.
Justice Frear Decides There is Not
Eoough Ey denoe 10 Convict
the CRIMINALS.

The campaign sinaugurated by the
| pastors OF Honolulu churches agains.
the infamous practices OF japanese pro
curers in this city has so far come to
naught. In the Supreme Court yester-
day sixteen of these degenerate Asiat. cs
were set free by decision of Justice
Frear, though a convection on the
char ge against them-disol derly CO..
uuct-had been earnestly worked foI
and expected.
! 1nese slAUeen men are maSte- S OF Jap
anese women whom they Vi. LuaLy treat
-, saves, AID IioIu Tie earnings Oh the
women they live In luxury. 1t naS bee.
proven that these MAZE procurers are
| LANDED together In socIe.ies, strong lii
..umDels AID III power among the Jap
aLese colony, and that they boast open
! Iy OF their contempt for the law ana lOl
those moral prime pies which max
Their trade so hideous 10 Self-respecIing
citizens.
Undoubtedly the Supreme Court was
helpless in the premises to punish these
| scoundrels. Through technically
they are libel ated to pursue theil
wretcned business, and were but a few
hours without the clutches of the law
when they had again sent upon the
streets the poor victims of their greed.
TIE opinion Of Justice Frear in the
case, as rendered by him orally yester-
day was as follows, IN the case OF Hi
guchi, one OF the procurers:
Assuming that the defendant has
been for a portion at least of the IA
TX months an idle person, and while
such he lived with woman on Sm..n
street, a woman who, at his direction,
had room on River street from to II
o'clock evenings, and then returned to
the defendant-whith, take it, are the
main facts relied upon by the prosecu-
zion, the question remains whether the
acts are sufficient to warrant finding
that the de e. dant during that time ere
ated disturbance of the peace, that be
ing the offense he is charged with. We
have to resort to the common law for
the principles of criminal law for the
definition of many of the terms in
volved.
But are the facts admitted sufficient
to warrant finding that the defendant
IS guilty Of the charge, or has created q
disturbance Of the peace within the
definitions of the common law even. 1t
seems to me there are at least two
points to be borne in mind One is that
common law many acts are indict-
able, and perhaps there are many acts
in our sta -utes for which a person will
be crimirally liable because they tend
TO corrupt the pub &c morals, or tend
to endanger the public safety, or ter d
disturb public tranquility, and
Whlch are not indlctab.e because they
are not breaches OF the peace.
al
statue here describes the otfenGe as a
| common nuisance, and then say that
common nuisance may consist O
auch acts as charged in this case.
Ahother point to be borne in mind
IS that some violence is an essentia
ingredient. This violence need not be
actU2l, but the same kind of act NAV
uIoer soma circumstances, contribute e
20 preach OF the peace. A person NAV
rive through the streets in such way
IS 20 disturb the general peace. A per-
lon may carry firearms in such a wav
is to create disturbance of the peace.
and yet others could carry them and
make disturbance.
Il cannot find from the evidence in
MS case that the defendant has Great
ed disturbance of the peace. | find
Aothlng In the authorities which won. d
warrant that. The only conclusion is
nat the defendant must be discharg-
ed'
The decision was received in silence
on both sides until the Justice author
lied the interpreter to notify the de-
sndant, Higuchi, of his discharge.
which was done. Mr.. Bal,ou and Mr..
McClanahan asked for a few minutes
lime in which to confer with Theodore
richards and others who were preseni
ana interested in securing the convic-
uons. After consultation in the hall
way, for about two minutes, M. Nc
Olanahan entered the room again and
sad: If the Court ease we desire TO
enter noile prosequi in al the other
cases. The evidence we proposed to
introduce in all the other cases. would
cover the same ground as in this one
The sixteen defendants were then
.lned up in row and the Judge or
sred their discharge which was done
through the Interpreter. The Japanese
We're effuGive over their release and an
informal reception was held in The cor
fldors Of the Judiciary Building.