The Hawaiian gazette., 1901-06-14
THURSTON
is UPHELD
Contempt Case
Goes to Pieces
Easily.

r~fitlOn OF L. n lnuIHNhN lhl u VIII
et habeas corpus discharging the pc
titioner from custody on the ground
that there IL nothing on the record To
show that he had committed any Of
tease or been convicted OF or sentenced
for having committed any offens"
What Judge Humphreys probably IN
gsnded TO do was to fine and imprison
Gr. Thurston for contempt Of court.
but he did not say so. Neither III
record. the judgment nor the mittimu-
ooatAlns the word contempt" nor d.
,hey say what the offense is. for which
punishment IL prescribed. The sen
tance Is therefore void, as the court
kas no power TO find or imprison any
man on general principles, but only ~
punishment OF a specific offense 81
which he has been specifically found
guilty
The whole sentence being Illegal,
there WAS no occasion to consider the
other points made In Mr.. Thurston's
behalf. viz: that the question which
he refused to answer was a privileged
one: and that the Grand Jury asking
the question was Illegally drawn.
Judge Frear's decision in fun is as
follows:
IN the Supreme Court OF the Territory
Of Hawaii.-In Chambers.
FL Parte Thurston.-Habeas Corpus.
Submitted May 20, 1901. decided June IL.
1901, Before Frear. G. ].
Tks petitioner, having refused as
witness to answer certain questions put
10 him by the Grand Jury In the Circuit
Court Of the First Circuit, was ordered
by the Court to appear and show cause
way he should not be required 70 answer
such questions. He made showing
WHICH the Court held insufficient in law
as to one OF the questions asked. namely,
as to tho name OF client OF his. He
contended that he was privileged from
answering this on the ground that 70 do
30 would be a violation Of his coniiden-
tial relation as attorney TO his client.
The mittimus, which is set forth in the
return, after reclting the proceedings at
length, continues: And the said l.. A.
Thurston being then and there by the
Court ordered and directed to appear be-
fore the Grand Jury and furnish TO 1t in
response to its interrogatory the name
Of his alleged client and the said i. A.
ThUrston then and there in open court
declining to do so,
1T Is ordered and adjudged that the
said L. A. ThurstOn be and he is hereby
nned in the sum of one hundred dollars;
ana II Is IlstIer ordered anu duJuuB-
I'd that said l.. A. Thurston be and he is
hereby committed to prison until such
time as he shall express his Willingness
TO appear before the said Grand Jury and
answer the interrOgatory aforesaid, to-
wit. TO disclose the name of his alleged
client" etc.
II appears that the petitioner declined
10 answer a certain question and that
thaeupon the Court sentenced him to
pap fine and suffer imprisonment 1t
nowhere appears that the petitioner was
convicted OF contempt. A person cannot
lawfully be sentenced for the commits
sion OF an offense until he has been duly
convicted or found guilty OF the offense.
IL may be perfectly clear from the evil
dencc in criminal case tried before a
Jury that the defendant has committed
g. certain Oifense, but the Court cannot
sentence HIM for 1t until the jury have
rendered II verdict OF guilty against him
Il Is equally true that the Court cannot
N criminal case heard or tried by it.
self pronounce sentence until II has
found the defendant guilty. contempt /
such as II is contenGed the petitioner
committed Is a criminal omensc and no
.entence can be pronounced until after
conviction in such a case any more than
IN other criminal cases. The mttlmus I
does not show that the petitioner was .
convicted OF any offense, nor does Il .
show Of what offense he was convicted,
Il he was convicted OF any offenso.
In Ex psrte Adams, 20 Hiss. s92, the
Court Ordered that George H. Adams
be sent 10 jail. and remain there until he
'ignines his assent TO the Court to an
iwsr questions TO the Grand Jury, or un-
~ final adjournment Of said Grand Jury
u this term Of court" On habeas cor
hoe .. al.
'rrors and appeals, the following Ian
suage. quoted IN Church, hab. Corp.
&c 332. was used But It Is clear that
general order 10 imprison "A party un-
sss he has been convicted either by
ury or by the Court Is mere nullity, ,
.he law requires that before sentence
y imprisonment shall be passed against
nErty, he should first be convicted OF
n Offense. In ordinary cases, this con
.icu0n must be by the verdict OF a jury.
n the cas-" OF contempts. II may be hy
he judgment OF the Court. sim In
'iiher Gaze. the record must show con
.iction. Now n Will be seen from this
-eturn mat there .s no Judgment VI i'm
IrlH0nmeut for a contempt generally, or
Tor contempt iU refusing tD answer
questions. There Do not any conviction or
adjudication by the Court chat Nj I
Adams had been guilty of q contempt
without such Judgment the Court had
l0 right 10 commit him 90 prison nor the I
ihariH ~ drtun him n is trur ana was 7
admitted on ihr argument rHat 81
adams did refuse tO answer questions /.
izEri by tho Grand luB and I Wty boz
roo mat ODE iUsTl considered tHul
lIrmpi fpr which De- lr5tN.I WpUs
nrnl hul u0 Hurh Judgment bar boon
Hlarr1 M iHr nlsr ana however m4uH
irmpH enc prisoner Wly have rUm
I.ra. it Do u9i laHul AZ lmUfaYu HiW
10 convicted ihtrrui by lhr Judgement
y me Count RhIrh luigmnnt ami eau
pom muHl appr4f Dos hu rrrHU
frr also rHFpu N rnsslrl ~ iHi
~ 10 pHun ph4rH Oh NO. f FtU
iAr ~ RaHnall Paige h lu ~ Walr
: We ~ Sherwood So sherwood All
4neg y isNHH iAfanaHh fafksF
tr a. "
me asmt slrN sHms is m Hrla W +
Fnslsnd M ~ pAln airlaH in. "a .
~ Do pfarf ANhf fHluF mrA fanlNa F..
iHNli#lf HFni nn ~ lnlNka Ihai M .
lRia Anauh k4r aanaau ~ Hand am
HHliRa ~ liH flhlulf ri IhH hFFHl ~