The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-02-28
QUESTION
PAU.
No Appeals From
the Supreme
Court.
FEDERAL MATTERS
ARE EXCEPTED
Correspondence of Justice Frear
and Revision Committee
Chairman.
QUESTION has been raised as to

| ~ whether the decisions of the Su-
preme Court of the Territory of
Hawaii are final in all cases in which
no Federal question is involved, or
whether such cases may be taken on
appeal to the United States Circuit
Court of Appeals in California, or to
the Supreme Court of the United
J States
! The Supreme Court of the Territory
of Hawaii has decided that no appeals
| lie in such cases, and that only cases
in which Federal questions are involved
can be taken by writ of error to the
Supreme Court of the United States.
In other words, that the Territorial
courts of Hawaii are on the same foot
ing as the courts of the several States,
and not that of the courts of other
Territories
/ The commission to revise and codify
the criminal and penal laws of the
| United States appears to have come to
the same conclusion, but thought that
it was through an oversight. The fol-
| lowing correspondence between Chief
Justice Frear, of the Hawaiian Su
! preme Court and Chairman Bothin, of
the Revision Commission. shows that
| they now consider this to have been
the intention of Congress. Mr.. Frears
letter, dated February l, directed to
Attorney General Griggs, was as fol-
| lows:
The commission to revise and codify
| the criminal and penal laws of the
| United States, in their report set forth
! in your report to Congress for the
year 1880, at page 403, quote certain
provisions of the Act to provide
! government for the Territory of Ha-
wall, and express a belief that an
omission was unintentionally made of
any provision for appeals from the
| United States District Court for Ha
| wall to the Supreme Court of the Unit
! ed States, and in this l think they are
| entirely correct.
| But they further say, Neither is it
certain that the language of the sem
! tence last quoted confers any right of
appeal from the Supreme Court of Ha
waii to the Circuit Court of Appeals,
| or to the SupremezCourt OF the United
! States, and the act contains no other
provision on the subject; yet it is
| scarcely to be presumed that Congress
meant to deny TO that Territory a right
that is enjoyed by all others In this
L respectfully suggest whether they
| were not under a miSapprehenSion. I
believe the intention was that cases
| in which Federal questions are involv-
ed might be taken to the Supreme
Court of the United States by writ of
error, as from the highest courts of
the several States, but that all cases
of a local nature should be finally set
tied here. And it seems to me that the
language OF the Act is capable of such
construction. To have the latter class
of cases finally decided here is deemed
a privilege. and not the denial of a
ri =
the commission above referred to.
When the Hawaiian Commission was
in session in Honolulu, such was the
expressed desire of the bar and the
business community. In the report of
the Hawaiian Commission. at page 162,
is found this language by the sub
committee on judiciary: BY making
the relations between the Territorial
; courts of Hawaii and the Federal
courts, as to appeals, removal of
spending relations between the state
and Federal courts, all cases of local
nature can BE- tried and determined
finally in the Islands, and thus the ex-
pense and delay of bringing such cases
to the Mainland, and possibly to Wash
ington, a distance of 5000 miles, will
be avoided. This was quoted by Mr..
Knox, chairman of the House Commit
tee on Territories, in his report upon
the Hawaiian bill to the House. on
|
decision by GU" Supreme Court upon
$500 wv. F. FREAR.
"Chief Justice. Supreme Court. Ter
ritory of Hawaii"
The foregoing letter was referred by
the Attorney General to the commits
sion, the chairman of which wrote the
following reply, which was received
Yesterday:
The commission to revise and codify
the criminal and penal laws of the
United States
''WASHINGTON, ID. c. Feb Ia, 1901
Hon. w. F. F'rear, Chief Justice OF
the Supreme Court, Honolulu, Hawaii
Sir-Yours of the 1st instant to the
Honorable Attorney General has
reached US by reference. Hawaii hav-
ing been expressly made Territory
; we assumed that 1t was the purpose OF
Congress to conform it's judicial estab.
lishment to that of the other Terrific.
ries. We had not, however consulted
the report of the Hawaiian Commission
from which you quote. In the light OF
that report, and of the considerations
l presented in your letter and in the de
cision enclosed, we concur with yol
/ that the decisions of the Supreme
Court of the Territory should be final
except in cases involving Federal ques
: tons.
we regard it as subject of regre
that Congress shows no disposition a
this session to make provision for ap
peals from the United States Distric
Court of Hawaii to the Supreme Cour
: OF the United States; but the pressure
I OF other matters presumably account
I for the failure. Very respectful.
/ yours, ALEX. c. BOTKIN,
] Chairman"
- THEIR CLAIMS SET AT REST.
Y The claim of other cough medicine
; to- be as good as Chamberlain's are eff
fectually set at rest in the followin
testimonial of MI. c. D. Glass an EN-
ployee of Bartlett & Dennis Co. Gar