The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-09-13

Territorial legislature can enact szws
Inconsistent Herewith. And # Congress
csrror ec1rzol TIE censzifzEsozAl rights
q czrEzszs efrsT sheT have occs essn az
tended 70 thaz n the TsrTltoeies- ho=
ear re Territories themselves do this
through sheEr courts o. otherwise
See Thoups0n -. Utah. 10. vAers the
Court. ar page $40. says.
Assuming that the provisions relating
70 trials for crimes and 70 criuinai pros-
ecuti0ns spplF 20 the Territories Of the
United States. the uext inquiry IS.
whether the jury referred 70 in the orig
iRal Constitutional AID IN tie Sixth
Auendnenf thereto IL 3 jury constituted
as Il was a. common law Of twelve per
sors neither more nor less : 1kss
question mast Be aasreTet ~ IKE Gftrm-
sfsre."
Quoting appr0vingiy from Springfield
rs Thomas les c. s 107. where the
.Tn our opinion the Seventh Amend
nent secured nnanimify in finding YER
diet. as an essential feature of trial by
Jury in common law cases: and the Act
Of Congress could not impars the power
10 change the constitutional rule and
could not Be treated as attempting to DO
So
<L414 estsu3AA ~ EfE-E 49, AAaI-A t~t-- -
Utah supral. the Court says:
The Constitution Of the United States
gave the accused at the time Of the com
mission Of the oifense. right TO be tried
by a jury Of twelve persons. and made
il impossible 20 deprive him of his lib
erty except by the unanimous verdict OF
such jury
See also Webster rs. Reid. II Haw.
49,; 460: American Publishing Co vs.
Fisher. 166 {. s. 464; 46S-
In Direct Violation of Constitution.
The finding of true bin by a Circuit
Judge or in any other manner than by
the indictment of a Grand jury proper
/ " empowered TO act in the premises, is
/ IN direct violation of the provisions of
/ Article V. of the Amendments to the Con-
stitution of the United States, and any
person found guilty of an infamous
crime without such indictment by a
Grand jury is Illegally convicted and
should be released on habeas corpus. Eek
parte Balm. 121 Z. S. ex parte Parks.
los e. s. 10; Gallon Va Wilson, 121 q.
s. 500
| 1t is fallacious TO attempt to limit the
force Of the Constitution in this Terri
tory. or in view of the clear intent OF
he Resolution of Annexation TO curtail
| he constitutional rights of the citizen
| The pointing out to the people. as the
| Supreme Court of the Territory has done.
| hat the Constitution sis not here in all
| rs fullneSs" without stating what parts
are and what parts are not here. simply
Sefogs the question: and the argument of
/ he Assistant Attorney General Of the
Territory that trial by jury is not one Of
he fundamental propositions of the Con-
/ stitution is contrary to the settled opin-
| 'ons of such illustrious American jurists
- Marshall. Story and Kent. and also
| II the leading American statemen who
assisted in framing those Amendments TO
he Constitution.
The history of the trial by jury is the
history of English and American civiliza-
tion. 1t has come down to us from Mag
IA Charta. and in criminal cases every
presumption is in favor of sustaining it.
| | am of the opinion that the proceed
| ;ngs in the Territorial Courts of Hawaii
COR the indictment and conviction of the
petitioner herein were contrary to law
aud void. and that he is entitled to be
discharged on habeas corpus.
Let the prisoner be discharged
| ESTEE.
Judge.
Dated September 18th, 1901.