The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-09-04

d. tIIlS expression was USED |
by Mr. Davis half dozen times, and |
every time he fairly Kissed the words, |
casting. glare of whitening scorn at
CatncarO, how a. Perry, the first judge
OF the first Circuit Court of the Republic
OF Hawaii, held his office at that time;
now was he exercising his authority?
Answer that, Mr.. Attorney General, if
you can. 1 will answer it for you. He
held office by virtue of a commission and
by the authority of William Mckinley,
President of the United States"
In order to save time interrupted
Judge Estee, II win tell you Mr. Davis,
that this court will not take into consid-
Grafton any argument touching the j'r!s-
diction of the Supreme Court of Hawaii,
or OF the qualifications Of Mr.. Perry"
The court misunderstands me" re-
piled Mr.. Davis. Il was not referring to
the Supreme Court, but to the Judge on
the bench who sentenced this man. He
was exercising his judicial functions by
virtue of the appointment by the Pres
ident of the United States. And yet they
come In here and contend that Hawaii
was not part D the United States
The constitution is higher than Con-
gress, greater tiian the President, yes,
even greater than this little territory of
Hawaii. 1t is an important fact that
when the people of these islands ceded
their territory to the United States. they
became part of the United States for
better and for worse; and the laws of
the United States and not the municipal
legislation of an annihilated republic,
governed. Mr.. Cathcart contends that
this republic here was not a part of the
union; and that the republic was stalk
ing about like ghost, during the tran
sition period, and Mr.. Cathcart, by the
aid of the Supreme Court, wanted to boil
ster up and put life in has =; ,st
Your duty at the conclusion of this
argument will be to set the prisoner free,
regardless of the consequences. We have
exhausted the courts of the Territory in
our efforts to get justice. You don't
have to overrule the Territorial courts,
but things are coming to a pretty bad
stage when the Supreme Court denies
the rights of courts to issue writs of
habeas corpus, and prisoners as soon as
set free are rea-rcStrd at the door nf the
court room. I think the time has come
for interference the part of your
honor. and 1 know that the officials of
the Territory will not dare disobedience
of this courts demands
During his argument Mr. Davis referred
to the De Lima case, the Marshall case,
ex parte Balm, and reviewed his argu-
ment generally in the former habeas cor
pus proceedings.
MR.. CATHCART REPLIES
Mr.. Cathcart was allowed but few
minutes to reply yesterday afternoon be-
fore adjournment, and will conclude his
argument this morning. He confined
himself chiefly to the question of juris-
diction, and argued only on that point.
II would like to present as a prelimi-
nary question" said Mr.. Cathcart, the
cumstances presented here, this court
can assume JURISDICTION? cort-nd that
a United States District Court should
not take jurisdiction in this habeas cor
nus cas-. AMI r-riew .ii,. arii"n Of u e
Supreme Court of the Territory of Ha-
wall, but leave the petitioner to the prop
er proceeding on writ of error from the
Supreme Court of the Territory to the
Supreme Court of the United States"
Mr. Cathcart then offered to quote the
decision of Judge Estee in the Marshall
case, but was interrupted by the latter.
Il want to say that this court has de-
sided squarely on that one point, that
where Federal question is not involved
and in that ease where IL wls only a
misdemeanor, the Court wouldn't have
Jurisdiction anyway. This court has
great hesitancy in approaching such
case. In only rare cases will a United
States District Court interfere where
cases have been carried to the Supreme
Court of State or Territory, but I CAM
see why the United States Court should,
not pass upon questions where life and
liberty are at stake
Il think there is a rule laid down for
the government Of sdch cases AMI the
court should follow that rule replied
the Deputy Attorney General Mr.. Cath
0art then conre1 led ti.at the proper pro
cedure was an appeal to the Supreme
Court upon writ of error from the, Su-
preme Court of Hawaii.
Our position here is a most peculiar
one" remarked the court. Here we are
isolated 1000 miles from the main land.
and our chances to be heard at Wash
ington, 5000 miles from here, seem al
most like a denial of justice. We have
no means of communication with Wash
ington, and it seems to me the conditions
here are very unique we are further
away from Washington and the Supreme
Court than any other part of the United
States
Mr. Cathcart didn't believe that we
were so far off as to make communica-
ton impossible. and thought the case
might easily be presented to the Su-
preme Court. Il am going to try and
show a legal rule promulgated by the
Supreme Court of the United States
he said. which says that the District
Courts of the United States except in
certain exceptional cases, shall not as
sumo Jurisdiction in habeas corpus mat
tiers where they have already beeen con-
sidered by the courts of the States or
Territories. The Supreme Court then
shows what exceptional cases are. and 1
think 1 can prove by the decisions of
the Supreme Court that this is not an
exceptional case
Il appreciate all that. Mr. Cathcart,''
returned Judge Estee. land this court
does not intend to rush into jurisdiction;
but if / decide that this court has juris-
diction. I shan't hesitate in acting upon
the question
Court then adjourned until this morn
ing, when the hearing of Mr. Cathcarts
argument will be resumed.