The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-12-14
WORK
AT AN END
Liquor Conviction
Concludes the
Term.
DECLARES LAW
IS INVALID
Schnsck and Juen Sentenced to
Jail for Twenty Days lnlunc-
ton Refused.

The criminal business OF the NoVem-
Der term was concluded yesterday at
%ternoon in the Circuit Court and h
petit Jury was finally discharged after
having beer thanked by Judge Hlmph-
reys for their long and untirinS labor.
The extended term closes next Monday
and the finishing touches to the court
work will be given today. The GRIM
inal part of the calendar was unusually
heavy. but that part of the docket Is
practically cleared of all except the
transition period cases.
LIQUOR SELLER CONVICTED.
Richard Kunst was found guilty OF
LIQUOR selling by a jury yesterday af-
~tarnoon in spite of the instruction OF
Judge Humphreys ordering the jury to
disregard the testimony of the govern
ment as to people coming from the de-
~fendant's place with liquor.
In his ruling the court declared I'M
constitutional Section 457 of the Penal
Laws of 1897. The decision, upon a mo-
tion by Deputy Acknowledgement Cath
cart for an instruction in compliance
with this statute which reads. 'lbe de-
livery of any spirituous liquor ither by
the owner or occupier or by his or her
servant or other person in the house 1r
place. shal be deemed to be SIfficlent
prima facie evidence ozmoney C. other
c. nsideration being given for sHch splr
ituous liquor, so as to support Il con-
~viction unless proof to the contrary be
given to the satisfaction OF the jury"
The court held in a written opinion
that no statute makes it Illegal to give
away spIrituous liquor in ones own
house. end the enforcement Of this
statute would mean that a man could
he convicted for giving liquor ~ a sick
eiehbo The court then goes into a
historical review of the enforcement o.
laws on the plea of necessity. referring
to the reign of Stuarts and Tudors and
recited a story of Virgil. when he
makes the onmon Sybil lead his hero
through his tabled hell"
In conclusion the court says, "unde
the statute we are. considering the de-
PENDANT is practically required TO prove
his innocence. The fact of a PERSONS
going into a house Is a perfectly limo
cent act. but If he is found with spir-.
ituous liquor upon coming out, a crime
is 10 be presumed. and the owner or
the house. who may have been miles
awav-beyond seas, is presumed to be
guilty of selling.
"The innocent act is established; che
consequences OF guilt are not found
by the jury on the evidence. but are
fastened upon him by the law rDrn the
SIMPLE proof of an innocent act. car
not bring myself to a subscription of
this doctrine. and believing the statute
unconstitutional, ] decline to instruct
under IT."
The jury was instructed and ,etired
shortly before three o'clock and it re-
quired over two hours to reach an
agreement Of guilty. Mr.. Strauss i'm
J mediately moved for a new trial, which
is to be heard this morning, at which
time the defendant will be sentenced.
The jury was composed as fciibws:
James Kahalepua, H. c. Rickerton,
Alex K. Aona. Alex G.. Nicholas, Guy
Livingston, George w. Harrison. jos.
Richards, Harry s. Swinton, isaiah
Bray, Edwin K. Blake. John L. Hans
mann. James X. Merseberg.
SEVERELY PUNISHED.
Severe sentences were imposed by
Judge Humphreys upon VIM. Savidge,
Harry Juen and ]. H. Schnack, found
guilty of assault upon an old native wom-
an. while attempting TO evict her. Saw
Iidge was fined 500. while each of the
other two men were sentenced to Jail
for terms of twenty days each without
hard labor. Notice of appeal was given
In each case, and the defendants were re-
LEASED under bail. Savidge 800 and the
remaining two each $500 each.
THE testimony in this case" said the
Court, in passing sentence, tended TO
show to the satisfaction of the jury that
You are guilty of the crime charged. Ka-
makea was in possession of these prem
tiSeS under n claim Of title which che
thought vas good. The defendant
Schnack was out of possession. though
he claimed title also, and went with
Juen and Savidge to evict the aged &C.
cupant. The woman failed to leave at
their request, and hey forcibly seized
her and removed her from the premises.
The complaining witness in this case Is
old and feeble, about ninety years of age
II seems. and the defendants going ON
the premise and finding this woman
alone and unprotected, proceeded to dis
possess her. The case IS a peculiarly
hard one. Here was an old Hawaiian
woman, ignorant of the law. but believ-
ing she was in rightful possession. and
here were three intelligent men. at least
knowing your rights by law. going to the
place; not taking into consideration her
sex. years and gray hairs: seized her.
which you would have been, by your own
admissions. too cowardly to do had a
man been about the place. Such action
calls for severe condemnation. something
more than a money penalty. The law
allows a maximum. fine of 500. while the
PRISON sentence may be six months. The
money penalty seems wholly disDropor-
uonate TO the term of imprisonment and
were ! even To inaict the full ne7altv Of
500 fine. men OF wealth might think that
ny SIMPLY paying a fee OF 800. which
the me amounts to, they could dispos-
sess a person of property coveted bv
them. The evidence does not show that