The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-11-19
BIIuFF let IS
SUSTAINED By COURT
Refusal to Admit Jour
nails of the Two
Houses.
BASED ON SUPREME COURT RULING
CERTIFIED COPY OF ACT SHOWS
1T WAS DULY ATTEsTED
AND SIGNED.
BASED ON SUPREME COURT RULING
Attempts to Question the EmpaneI-
ling of Grand Jury is overruIed-
Kane Accused Of EmbezzIement
Is Found Not Guilty. -

The question Of the validity Of the
BailiT Act was decided yesterday
morning in the First Circuit Court,
Judge Humphreys presiding and
Judge Little sitting with him on the
bench. The motion presented by A.
G. NJ Robertson. on behalf OF W. K
Rathburn. indicted for perjury, TO
quash the jury panel for the present
term was denied. and it was held by
the court that the journals of neither
the House nor of the Senate could be
introduced in evidence, il being held
that the properly attested copy of the
act on file with the Secretary of the
Territory was better evidence, that
the act passed the Legislature than
would be furnished by either journal.
High Sheriff A. NJ. Brown, Edgar
Caypless. Clerk of the Senate. and
Solomon Meheula, Secretary of the
House of Representatives were sworn
for proof of the illegality of the act
The officials of the Legislature pro-
duced the printed journals but the
court ruled that the original minutes
should have been produced and the
journals were ruled out
Attorney Robertson argued that the
act was not properly passed in the
Legislature because it had not been
read three times, as required by the
provisions of the Organic Act When
Mr.. Robertson inquired If the court
wished to hear any further argument
on the point, after the journals had
been ruled out of evidence, the Court
replied that it did not. The matter
had been settled, it said. by the
Supreme Court OF the United States
and no amount of argument would
convince the Court that it had a right
to override the Supreme Court at
Washington. Mr. Robertson did not
urge the point. He admitted that the
copy OF the act on file was properly
attested by the officers of both houses
and signed by Governor Dole. Exeep-
tons were noted to both rulings
whereby the journals OF the Legisla
turei were not allowed in evidence.
Robertson raised another point
Under Section 1109 OF the civil laws
it is provided that no person shall be
subject to criminal prosecution ex-
cept in accordance with the Hawaii
an laws. and under this provision the
attorney claimed the protection OF the
Hawaiian statutes as to methods Of
securing jurors, for his client
Cathcart said that Congress had
done away with the Hawaiian jury
laws by amendments that emasculat-
ed them. The Court sustained this
argument.
In giving his decision Judge Hum
phreys said:
When we required a Grand Jury
for the first time in this Court, the
Court was much perplexed by the be-
lief that Congress had emasculated
the whole of the Hawaii jury laws.
and that therefore there was no way
to draw a jury Consultations were
had with the Chief Justice and with
Judge Perry and the opinion was
unanimous that we could no: draw
jury under our old statutes. Con-
gress had provided that we should
draw a jury. and the question was
how to do it. 4 resort was had to
the common law powers of the
Court"
The defendants contentious, tn
Court said. would leave the Court
without anv power to draw a jury at
all The challenge was overruled and
exceptions noted.
The case of Oliver Kane, a driver
of a Tramway mule car. came up in !
the afternoon Kane was charged |
with embezzling $3.50 from the
Tramways Company. It was alleged
that the money had been given the
driver at different times and in differ
ent amounts as change. The first sum
claimed to have been embezzled was
s25. and the prosecution testified /
that when the theft was discovered I.
Kane had been sent for and an ar
rangement made with him whereby /
he was to paw back the money in
weekly inStallments of $3.50 Shortly I
embezzied cash to the amount OF 81. /
so. and later, once more helped him. !
self to $40 Kane himself testified /
that the first amount OF SIS had beer
given him as change. but that. follow
ing the instruction of the foreman I
he had used the money for some pri-i
yate matters for the foreman The
other amounts he admitted he took.
but stated that he took them TO pa
the weekly instailmerts under the ar
rangements made after the alleged I
theft OF SIS
The trial occupied about two hours /
IN court. The Jury was instructed
some length h. ths Curt A verdict
cf rat gvs'it~- was returned after an
hours dels0srstion Assistant Attcr-
new General Dcuthitt conducted the
prosecution. and N. whitney, Jr-.
--pea-sd To- the defendant Mr..
't7e-- c1rdu~t-d fh~ defense in q
-e-~ caneh'e m=p--r and received q II
- c~--l'rns-ts from various
'--ai TEXTS rro1 the success OF his
-. 800 - swo-S IN the case
------- r--.-- - crm~ Ge~- W Wacv.
~-~-~ II rr~-A~-t'a uar-v 6 Swinf0n-
- ------- r-n>e x. Mers~barg.