The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-09-29

political IN character.
Ii Is further sought to gulssanfizse The
second charge hy exhibit III, heiRg e.
charge to the grand jEry b. Judge
Humphreys In this cilzrges judge
Humphreys specifically casi4d tic atfen-
ton Of the grand jury, as An Enen5slno
body, 10 certain abuses which be 1eileyeo
to b then existing, and as 70 which he
wished them to make Investigation The
charge IN question Is vigorous and
Iearsed exposition Of the rights and dn-
ties OF grand jury, and Incidentally ~
fers 70 the polits~si conditions which pre-
vailed prior to the annexation Of Hawaii
By the United States | shah NOT ven
Ture to express an opinion as 10 the JUS
tee or prCpriety Of these special refer
eDces- They were obviously made 10 IL
lnstrate the changes III the adniRistra-
ton of justice which the annexation of
Hawaii by the United States and the
application OF the criminal procedure OF
the United Sta = 60 Hawaii bad neees
sarily occasioned Remembering that
Hawaii IS IN a transitional period, and
that many of its people had not been
educated 10 those Angles Saxon principles
which govern the administration of JUS
fice IN the United States. it was proper
and perhaps the duty Of the various
judges TO instruct the grand and petit
juries in session before them as TO the
principles which must. under present con-
ditions control the administration of jus
tee in the Federal courts l can find
nothing IN the charge to indicate that
Judge Humphreys was animated by any
other consideration than the public good
and the solemn obligations of his great
Office.
The second charge has not been sas-
tanned bp adequate proof.
m.
The third charge AYERS that Judge
Humphreys has used his position on the
bench and the powers and privileges OF
his Office improperly TO promote his own
personal and political ends.
This seems to be merely restatement
of the second charge, and is supported by
exhibits 800 TO 332. inclusive
Exhibit 326 is written statement of
the Clerk of the Circuit Court to the eff
feet that some seventeen members of the
Hawaiian Legislature were admitted to
practice without any adequate examina-
ton. From the statement of the Clerk
it appears that Judge Humphreys did ex-
anime them as to whether they had read
the civil and penal code.
Exhibit 527 AYERS. in substance, that
these Hawaiians who had been admitted
to practice were ignorant of the English
language. and otherwise untitled for adj
mission to the bar. 1t is further sug
geSted that some of them resided per-
manently outside of the circuit It is
further sought to be shown that the adj
mission of these Hawaiian legislators to
practice by Judge Humphreys was an in
consistency on his part, as by the rules of
the court all proceedings must be con-
Quoted In the English language, and
Judge Humphreys had expressed his opin-
ion that no one should be admitted to
practice in the Circuit Court who re-
sided permanently outside of its jurisdie
ton.
The matter of these admissions to the
bar is purely a question for the discretion
Of the Judge. Administering law in a
court where the English language is
spoken, but in which many of the liti-
gants only speak the native tongue. pre-
sentS. necessarily. great difficulties.
Moreover. the conditions which prevail in
Hawaii necessarily require local courts
throughout the Islands. There are doubt
less many small communities at inaccess-
lille places which must have some meth.
obs of obtaining legal advice in the Ha-
waiian tongue and of adjusting their diff
ferenees. Judge Humphreys believed
that TO secure this end il was necessary
10 admit Hawaiians to membership in the
bar and in his judgment the members of
the legislature. who enjoyed a position OF
trust and responsibility. and who had di-
rect official relations with the native pop
uiation. and presumably enjoyed their
confidence were obviously proper recipi-
| ents of this special favor. | have no
reason to question the conclusions which
Judge Humphreys reached. and in any
event would regard il as matter entirely
within his discretion.
The third charge is further sought to
be established by exhibits $50 and 331
which show. in substance, that the editor
of The Honolulu Republican was indicted
| on February Is, 1901. for an assault with
a weapon dangerous to life. On Febru-
airy 10 a plea in abatement was filed BY
his attorney. On February % the plea
in abatement WAS argued before Judge
! Humphreys. 1t appears from the affidavit
| of Isorrin Andrews Exhibit 800 that
| Judge Humphreys, who was then pre-
siding at the term of court. expressed his
Discrimination TO hear any portion Of the
case and that the counsel for the prose
cut0r thereupon stated that the matters
| involved in the plea of abatement were
merely matters of law; that they did not
/ Affect the facts in the case, and that II
/ was very important that an early de-
cision should be rendered IN this case. and
requested that the Judge for these reasons
should hear the matter at once. The
Iudge therenpon stated fht he would do
50. and on or about the 18th day Of Feb
ruary, 1901, argument was had in the
matter. at the conclusion of which the
court stated that he would reserve de-
cision and would decide the case as early
as possible 1t appears that about
March 20. 1901. the prosecutor upor
whom the assault was alleged to have
been committed dise ppeared from Ha
wail. and from these facts the cnmplain.
ants against Judge Humphreys gTavelJ
aver thaf the decision of Judge Humph
FprS on the plea IN Abatement was SIM