The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-08-27

The above outline is in brief the opin-
( ion of the Supreme Court made yester-
day in the habeas corpus cases of the
alleged illegally convicted prisoners. and
in the case of Frank Pahia, sent to jail
indefinitely upon a charge of contempt.
In all these cases dissenting opinion
is filed by Judge Galbraith, and in all
of them Judge Gear is overruled.
The next move is an application to
Judge Estee in the habeas corpus eases
for a new writ on the ground that their
Imprisonment is unconstitutional and
the case consequently comes within the
jurisdiction of the United States District
Court.
| The decisions are given in the All Oh
case, and the court holds that Judge
Ferry is not disqualified, not having
considered that case, and in the remain
! ing cases because habeas corpus is an
entirely new proceeding.
The court bases its opinion upon the
Peacock and Edwards cases. which 1t is
commended We're sustained by the Su-
preme Court of the United States in the
insular cases, upon the points raised in
the present case.
The opinion in the All OF case is
written by Chief Justice Frear and con
tains twenty-five typewriter pages.
The dissenting opinion by Judge Gal
brath is almost as lengthy, and he not
only dissents but says that the major
! ity had no legal right to render a YER
diet in these cases because of the dis
qualification of Judge Perry.
All OF is esrving a ten years sentence
for burglary He had been convicted
by verdict signed by ten jurors, and
released by Judge Gear upon the ground
that the provisions of the Hawaiian
law which had been in force for sixty
years We're rendered invalid upon the
annexation of these Islands to the
United States"
Referring to the right of appeal the
court says:
3. 1t is strenuously cqptended that
no appeal lies in habeas corpus cases.
No doubt judgments in such cases are
usually held not renewable by appeal
or writ of error in the absence or
statute Whether appeals may be tax
en- in such cases as we'll as In otner
cases under a general statute relating
to appeals or whether such cases
must be specifically mentioned, are
questions upon which different views
have been entertained. There is also
some difference of opinion as to the
tadyisability of allowing appeals in such
cases. On the one hand 1t is urged
that the remedy by habeas corpus was
designed to be speedy, and that 1t
should be so in cases involving the
right of personal liberty. On the 9TH
er hand it is urged that questions OF
the gravest importance may De pre-
sented in such cases, and that to al
low any person imprisoned for crime
after a careful trial resulting in YER
dict by jury, a sentence by the court,
and. after affirmance by the supreme
Court. to obtain discharge whenever
he can find a judge who thinks that
the proceedings We're invalid, would De
dangerous in the extreme.
Let US turn" then says the court
"to our own statutes and practice upon
which. after all, the solution of this
question depends. These appeals are
from orders made by circuit judge IN
chambers The court then refers to
half a dozen cases decided by the Ha-
waiian Supreme Court in which II was
held that appeals did lie, even in ha-
beas corpus cases. cit may be-, says
the court. that this court would not
have entertained an appeal if the pris-
oners had been discharged and LAD es-
capped from the jurisdiction, but IN the
nrasent case they are still in custody
and the appeals would seem to act as
a supersedeas in these as in other
cases"
Referring TO the argument made that
no prisoner discharged upon VIII
shall be imprisoned again LOT ~ e
sa,,,e offanse. the court holds that thus
relates TO final discharge, and not 20
a discharge which has been arrested
by an appeal 1.-The records are before
ms in these cases precisely in the same
way as they always are on appeais
from circuit judges at chambers.
Concerning the principal question a.
issue the court says:
no