The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1900-10-16


ment on conviction of an obscure libel,
a mere misdemeanor' he began "yet IL
is one of the most important and far
reaching cases that has ever come be-
fore the courts. If the contention of
the petitioner is maintained, then every
man convicted since the twelfth day of
August 1898 is entitled to his liberty.
There are perhaps thirty men whose
hands are red with human blood, and
who are serving terms from life to
small term of years, and perhaps 100
others convicted of lesser crimes, who
will go free.
let this community can protect it
self against twenty five or thirty muir
derers and hundred men convicted of
rape, burglary, arson and other crimes.
They will die in the course OF nature.
sBut this question involves the ter
ritOry In ether ways, If the contention
made here is correct then the duties
collected by the Hawaiian Custom
house since August IL, 1898 have been
illegally collected. The customs duties
on Hawaiian products collected in New
York and San Francisco since August
IL, 1898 have been collected illegally.
PORTO RICO.
"If this contention is correct, then
Mr.. McKinley's administration is gov
erning Porto Rico illegally. If this con-
tention is correct then the United
States is either illegally in the Philip
pines, or else the 10000, 900 semt-savages
of those islands are citizens of the
United States. eva
'In short the question is, does the
constitution follow the flag or is It eX-
tended by congress?
This is one of the greatest and most
profound Questions ever presented be-
fore court. 1t involves the question
of whether the great United States
shall take it's place as world power, or
go back to it's farm. 1t is in these as
poets that the case is important to the
| S0,O0O,0OO people of America. Mr.. Mar
shall in this case is comparatively un-
| important. But the precedent set, if
this court takes jurisdiction will go on
| with-its influence for years and decades
affecting the whole course of history
and the American people.
1T is in these aspects that the case is
important"
| Attorney General Dole then said that
| it was possible Mr.. De Bolt had over
! looked part of the Territorial Act
which provided that the rules relating
to appeals and writs of error from the
! territorial courts to the federal courts
! shall be the same as those relating to
| them from state courts. This he claim
ed, disposed of Mr.. De Bolts argument
that there was different relation be-
tween the territorial and federal courts
and the state and the federal courts.
Mr.. Dole said he would cite but
one case. That was from the Su-
preme Court and held, Mr.. Dole claimed
! that the federal courts would not re-
view on habeas corpus proceeding the
tptig"rlents Of state COURTS except un-
\ de rPordlrAry nirou . ances. but
? wotiiu iefiye petitioners u tsie.: remedy
by writ of error.
MCKINLEY MISTAKEN
In conclusion Mr.. Dole said he die
not think this court would take the re.
sponsibility of deciding this great and
VeXed question when the petitioner
could secure a determination of his
rights by the plain, straight forward
means provided by the law, a writ OF
error to the supreme court of the United
States. Your Honor will not take thi.
responsibility of turning loose some
twenty murderers; of declaring that fol
two years customs duties have beer
collected illegally here and at New
York, San Francisco and Seattle; OF
declaring that Mr.. McKinieys admins
tration is a gigantic mistake in it's gov
ernment of Porto Rico; that the Fill
pinos are American citizen. There IL
a plain, direct straight forward way Il
have these questions determined, anG
that is by writ of error to the supreme
court of the United States, and prom
Use Mr.. Marshall and his counsel tha
1 will put no obstacles in the way O.
getting there"
At the conclusion of Mr.. Dole's argu
ment court adjourned until 2 o'clock
Gen. A. S. Hartwell will make an ar
gument against the jurisdiction of tn,
court as will Ex-Attorney-Gene w
o. Smith.
United States District Attorney Johl
1 c.. Baird appeared at o'clock as ami
Gus curiae to present an argumen
against the jurisdiction of the court.
TAKES AND HAWAII.
|, A brief of his argument is as follows
In this matter the jurisdiction of
Il Federal court is invoked to. annul tn
sentence and terminate the imprison
ment imposed in a criminal case tina
was prosecuted under the laws of tn
Republic of Hawaii, But one other Re
public was ever annexed to the Unite
States, and that was Texas. A scare
of the books fails to disclose any de
/ cisions arising out of that annexation
that bear directly upon the presen
/ question. 1t must be recalled tina
Texas was admitted into the Union a
a state possessed of complete stat
: constitution and statutes. One of thes
statutes which had been enacted by tn
Texas Congress was assailed upon tn
ground that 1t violated the provision
of Section 10 of Article Of the Consti
tuition of the United States declaFin
that mo state shall pass an
law imparing the obligation {
contracts" But the Supreme Coul
held, in the case of League v. Z
Young, ct al. II How. 1856, that the I
straints imposed by the Constitution