The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-05-21
ALLEGED SLAVERY IN HAWAII.
Oppressive Practices Contrary to the
American Constitutions.

Oppressive Practices Contrary to the
American Constitution.
NEW YORK. May 20.-On the case OF
Jorge Cruz, the citizen Of Porto Rico and
the United States, who was detained at the
port Of New York under the alien con-
tract labor law, hang other questions of
vital Importance to the new possessions Of
this country.
1t is said that In all matters Of indict-
ment and trial in Hawaii the Constitu-
tion of the United States has been abro-
gated. and slavery is virtually In existence
there.
Former Judge A. ]. Dittenhoefer has
made this statement
Under the laws of Hawaii person
could be tried on a criminal charge with
out an Indictment by grand jury. and he
could be convicted on a verdict of nine
jurymen instead of unanimous verdict
The Constitution Of the United States,
as construed by the Supreme Court, pro-
rides that no person can be tried on Fed
eral territory except on an indictment by
grand jury. nor can he be convicted ex-
cept on unanimous verdict
After the annexation of Hawaii to the
United States prisoners were tried not
outstanding this provision Of the COnsti-
tuition, without requiring an Indictment by
z grand jury, and were convicted on a
verdict of nine jurymen. Here is a case
that presents different features from those
that apply to Porto Rico and the Philip
pines. for Hawaii was annexed by joint
resolution of Congress to the United
States, and there ought to be little doubt
IA no pf cd AZ
applies there.
In the case OF the Honomu Sugar Com
pauy versus Nikoleg Czeluch, the defend
ant was a laborer brought from Austria
under contract to serve the sugar company,
which has plantation in Hawaii. Before
the expiration Of the period of three years.
for which he had contracted to serve the
company, he left.
He was arrested. tried. and convicted
for deserving and abandoning his contract
CT service. He was sentenced to imprson-
ment at hard labor until he consented to
return to his master and service according
TO law
This proceeding was had under the
penal law of Hawaii, which provides that
If any person bound to serve shall absent
himself from such service without leave
Of his master. any magistrate may order
his arrest, and upon conviction he may be
kept imprisoned until ne consents 10 re-
turn to his master.
This. it seems to me. is much like s'av-
cry. and yet after Hawaii became a Terri
tory of the United States the law was en-
forced, and the defendant was actually
tried without an Indictment by a grand
jury, was convicted on a verdict of nine
jurymen. was sentenced to hard labor and
to serve in penal institution until he
consented to go back to his master He
appealed from conviction. and the Supreme
Court Of Hawaii affirmed the conviction.
and all that occurred on territory of this
Republici''
Would the Cruz case determine the
regularity Of these proceedings" Judge
Dittenhcefer was asked.
Beyond all doubt it would II the court
on Tie Cruz case in any of the branches
which it has assumed. would decide that
Porto Rico is territory of the United
States. 1t would follow that the proceed
ings in the Hawaiian case would fall, for
the reason that there was no indictment,
no unanimous conviction, and that slavery
had been introduced into territory Of the
United States"