The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-08-11
aasgAs coaeus paocEg0.nss

ne acts1n OF certain zenbeEs C the
bar. Of Attorney ceneral DOse and Of
Jadse Fresr q the Supreme Cozrt IN
the various habeas cOrpas proceed
Inss now before the courts are sim
ply dlszrzcesui TEey show the gen
tienen to Be absolutely ignorant ct
The Law governing hsbeas corpus PRO
ceeaings and they are doing more
than anght else that could Be done TO
bring the Supreme Court and the
legal profession Of Hawaii into coz
tempt and ridicule for their Grass ig-
norance. II the thirty seven members
Of the Bar Association Who wanted
Judge Humphreys removed are TO be
judged By Attorney General Dole and
the attorneys for Frank Pahfa then
i Is weil that large number Of at
torneys did not attend the meeting
Of the association GaHged BY the
standard thus presented the associa
ton should make the qualifications
for membership to consist Of absolute
ignorance OF all law.
Even the layman. who has been a
general reader OF current topics. has
long since learned that haDeas corpus
proceedings are not appealable AS
shown BY The Republican yesterday
morning in citing a decision Of the
Court Of Appeals of the State of Tex
as. II writs OF habeas corpus were
subject TO appeal such action would
defeat the purpose Of the writ and
make OF the writ but a solemn mock
err. We would especially commend
this decision TO the Attorney General
and particularly would we commend
70 him what Church. on Habeas Cor
rus. says OF the respondent appealing
from writ OF habeas corpus. Says
this very good authority: Sound
policy forbids the right OF appeal be
ing granted to the respondent and
the law has not conferred it upon
him"
But then Attorney General Dole
needs no law to confer the right of
appeal upon the respondent. as repre-
scented by hia. as long as he believes
be has compliant Chief Justice to
crook the pregnant hinges of the knee
at every beck and nod of the repre-
sentative OF the Dole administration.
But if this attempt at appeal by the
Attorney General of the Territory
shows ignorance of the law and abso-
lutte violation of all rights of citizens.
so does the granting of an appeal by
Chief Justice Frear in the case of
Frank Pahia show an utter disregard
Of the law. A guardian appointed by
the court is just as much an officer
of the court as is a receiver or a
bailiff or any other appofntee of the
court Pahia purchased a piece OF land
from minor under the guardianship
Of the court. The court not only re-
fused to confirm the sale but directed
Pahia TO redeed the land to the minor.
This was as clearly within the power
OF the court as was the appointing of
the guardian. The Supreme Court
could have nothing to do with the ap-
pointing of the guardian, that was
matter resting entirely in the hands
Of the Circuit Court Pahia disobeyed
the express orders of the Circuit
Court and there was no method under
which the court could compel ODE
dience to its orders except By com
mitment for contempt. The Chief
Justice issued writ of habeas corpus
making it returnable before Circuit
Judge Gear. Judge Gear very proper
" dismissed the writ and now the
Chief Justice permits the filing of an
appeal upon the dismissal OF the writ
and the release of the prisoner upon
his depositing cash bail OF fifty dol
lars Was ever such an opera boure
performance witnessed in any civiliz-
ed country befores II is disgraceful.
4 stamps the Chief Justice as being
as ignorant of law as the Attorney
General. whose lack of knowledge of
the eommonest practice is notorious.
and il further stamps him as q par.
tisan judge who is willing to disgrace
his ermine If by so doing he can make
t appear to the ignorant and vicious
that the Circuit Judge had committed
an error