The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-06-18


The report Of the special grand jury |
published on another page shows that
the assertions Of bribery made by Gov
eruor Dole. and by the organ Of the
Thurston gang. against members Of
the Legislature had no foundation in
fact. The report shows that the whole
cry OF bribery was made for political
purposes. In his message 20 the Sen |
ate on April soth Governor Dole said:
What I did say was that had in
formation OF a character that / could
not ignore that bribery Of members
was going on in the Legislature, and
deem such information sufficient
grounds for refusing an extension Of
this session"
What did the Governor mean by this
positive and direct statement? When
called before the grand Jury the Gov
ernor testified that the information
he had was from second and third
hands; that at the time this message
was sent 10 the Senate he had no legal
evidence of bribery of members of the
Legislature.
In which instance did the Governor
tell the truth? Evidently be must
have told the truth before the grand
jury. being under oath to do So
Granted that he did this. why did he
make charges OF bribery against mem
bers OF the Legislature, coordinate
branch of the government? What was
the object OF the Governor in making
such serious charges He is a lawyer.
has been a member of the judiciary.
aud knows full well the value OF evil
denee. Surely he must have known
just as well on April seth that he had
no information of bribery excepting
hearsay as he did on May 10th. In
fact in the intervening time he should
have been able TO add to his informa-
ton IL what his Attorney General
stated in court on May 21st was true
The Attorney General In testifying
before the grand jury said that he
had no information in his possession
that would convict any member of the
Legislature OF bribery In his argu-
ment before the court on the refusal
Of Cooper ct al to give testimony be
fore the grand jury the Attorney Gen.
eral declared that the executive
branch Of the government had been at
work gathering information on which
to base prosecutions He went fur
Their and charged the court with an at
tempt to block the ends Of justice by
calling a grand jury TO investigate the
charges And yet the High Sheriff
in his testimony before the grand jury
says that che Attorney General never
said anything TO him about trying tC
secure evidence until the I7th or lsta
Ct May and then only in genera
way; that the Attorney General had
not given him any specific instruction.
as TO how to proceed or where h
could obtain information that wouls
lead to the detection Of the allegeS
guilty parties; nor had the Attorne,
General given him any evidence upor
which to act.
Naturally the question arises. wha
aid the Attorney General mean whei
he said ia his arguments before III,
court that the executive and the A,
torney Generals once we're investigai
ing the charges Of bribery and that tn
action Of the court in calling a gram
jury would impede the work of justice
Does it rot show from the High Sher
ms testimony that when the Attorne,
General made the statement he did 4
court he was deliberately classifying
And this is a sample Of the work an
methods Of the Dole administrators
and TIE TAurston sangsters- Lies an
false witness and every other crime il