The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1901-09-12
ESTEE DIsAGREES WITH THE
SUPREME COURT.
He Interferes as a Federal Judge and
Further Proceedings to be Taken.


the habeas corpus case of Osaki Man
kchi. Estee held that the Supreme
Court of Hawaii was wrong and Judge
Gear was right, in the recent success
sion of habeas corpus rulings. The de-
CisiOn applies to many other occupants
of oahu Jail. 1t is to the effect that
every man convicted of an infamous
crime in the Territory after July Z, 1898,
when the Newland5 resolution was
signed, who was tried without indicU-
ment of a Grand Jury, or convicted by
less than a unanimous verdict of l2I
jurors, was illegally tried and is now
illegally held in prison if held at all
The Judge admitted that it was a
very rare thing for a Feuerai court to
interfere with the proceedings of muni-
cipal courts, but he held that the cir
cumstances of the case warranted his
taking jurisdiction within his discretion
and enforcing the constitutional amegd-
ments over which the questions submit
ted arose.
There was a large crowd in the United
States court when the decision was
given. Circuit Judges Little and Gear
and Judge Dustin of Ohio, sat by Judge
Estee on the bench. In the courtroom
were many members OF the bar and a
large number of jurors who are in at
tendance in Judges Gear and Little's
courts.
just DeIOle EStee In CLOSING MS de-
cision made the order dscharging Osa-
XII, Attorney General Cathcart attempt
ed to interrupt to ask that the court
make the order conditional so that an
appeal might be taken Judge Estee
refused to be interrupted, and said
that he would make no further order at
present than to release the prisoner.
Cathcart wanted Osaki under bonds TO
reappear on appeal.
,In1up Egtpp int lima that tba NHyay
to proceed was to try the man over
again. He cannot be arrested again
in the presence of the court" said his
honor, but there is nothing in this
decision to protect him against the ac-
tion of a Grand Jury now" The court
having held that the old trial was void
altogether, OsalH has never been tried
at all, and the case may be begun over
again at any time.
Anticipating that Osak might be
discharged, the High Sheriff had a
warrant ready for his rearrest as soon
rs he came Out of the court house.
Knowing this Osakrs attorneys kept
him in the court room. and five police
officers were kept waiting around the
building to see that he did not come
out unawares to them and escape.
Finally Osaki decided to submit to
rearrest and came out with his attor-
neys Brooks and Davis.
AS he was taken into custody Brooks
reassured him by saying, Few days,
then all right again.
As soon as he left the building he was
arrested by Officer George Sea, on a
warrant charging him with the murder
of one Yee Fook Sing. one of the three
Chinese killed at KahHllu in March, 1899
The warrant was interpreted to him by
Chester Doyle, and he was taken back
to Jail The next proceeding will be to
try him on this charge, before Judge
Wilcox and then If he is committed, to
bring him before the next Grand Jury.
Judge EsteeS decision in the case, af-
ter giving a history of the indictment
of Osah by a circuit judge, his trial
without a Grand Jury and his cOnVic-
| tiOn and sentence on verdict of nine
| jurors, proceeded to discuss first the
| question of whether he should take
| jurisdiction, and second whether such a
| trial as Osakis was legal in Hawaii
| after the passage of the Newlands re-
| solution. The decision brings the con-
! stitution to Hawaii even before the
| flagraising of August, 1898 and puts
the constitution ahead of the flag here.
! IT was in its essential parts as follows:
d. THE. first point made by the
Assistant Attorney General for the Ter
ritory is that this Court has no jurs-
| diction to act and determine upon the
4
cause a writ of error should be sued
out of the Supreme Court of the United
states by the petitioner herein; that
whatever may have been the action of
| The territorial Courts, the United States
| Court ought not to interfere that this
| case is not one of sufficient gravity to
call for the interposition of this Court
| on habeas corpus
This is a Federal question raised in
"a Of Inf
erned by Federal law under the Con-
stitution and Statutes of the United
States. The authorities referred to by
! the Deputy Attorney General sustain
| ing his position against this Courts
assuming Jurisdiction in this proceed
ing are not in point. Not one of the
decisions cited relate to this class of
cases. This territory is under the con-
! troll of Congress and is not an inde-
pendent state with a Constitution and
local statutes governing the trial and
conviction or acquittal of persons
charged with crime.
I'm this habeas corpus matter, there
| is a wide difference of opinion among
| the territorial judges. Both the Su-
preme and Circuit Courts differ with
! each other, and the members of the
| Supreme Court differ among themselves
| and especially so upon the question of
| the relation which this territory bears
| to the Constitution and laws of the
| United States For instance the Su-
pTeme Court of this territory held in
| the very recent case of HOnomu Su-
| gar co. VS.. Sayewiz. az Haw. 96), that
| 'eTtain amendments Of the Constitution
! " the United states We're not in force
here between the 18th day of July, 1898
| nd the 18th day of June 1900 namely
| articles V, VI, VII and XIII, which
| articles relate to Indictment by grand
ury for infamous crimes, to a com
! non law jury trial, and to the existence
If slavery in the territory of the United
| 'tates. While the Supreme Court de.
| 'ided i'm the case of ex parte Edwards
| l3 Haw. 32) that no person could be
| ut upOn trial for an infamous crime In
the Hawaiian Islands after August 12tt
| 1898 Cthe date of the raising of the
| American flag here) without having