The Independent. [volume] (Honolulu, H.I.) 1895-1905, 1901-05-08

assailed their, integrity ss jurors
and their loyalty rs citizsns.
This official and deliberate con.
demnatiou must have rested eutire-
ly upon the one case where Soder.
gren WAS acquitted; for but three
other cases we're triad before the
jury. In two, one Of them being
another case against this same de-
feudant Sodergreu, the jury convict.
ed, and in the third where they &C.
quilted, Mr. Dune, who prosecuted,
assured severa of the jurors person
ally that be believed they hal rend.
ersd proper verdict.W- thus lac
the prov ,ting attor ICY, att,r
three verdicts that met the approval
Uf ths prosecution, and WHICH con-
stituted the fist three jury cases
that we're tried by the Federal
Court in this couulrys bessu,e he
lost the fourth, announcing rfficial'y
aud iu cold blood (for he verdict had
been rendered the night previously
that ",t se med for thu present at
least thst it was absolutely WORSE
than useless to have a conviction ia
q case where thu United States was
prosecutor" Following this up,
Mr., Baird made vicious attack on
the characters OF the jury, refused
further to prosecute before them,
released this defendant next to he
tried, and final y wound up by caus-
ing the dismissal OF theeeritirs panel,
aud abruptly clesed the term.
No specific accusation Of .miscon
duct against the jury was made, nor
wa, any act outside OF the verdict
of acquittal charged as improper.
And il such accusation ia IN ada, the
jury declare it utterly and bad
faith is evidently based upon the iu-
ferences the prosecuting attorney
saw fit to draw from the siugle fact
that the jury had acquitted the de-
fendant, and this DEMONSTRATES VIII at
a slight barrier rem aims to protect q
Juror in the discharge Of his official
dutiss from a personal assault upon
his character and uuenviaDla no.
totiety throughout the Territory, in
serving wherever Mr.. Baird is eou
cerned.
Coming to the case complained
Of, the jury looked at it, brie a y
spsakipg, this way: The defendant
was, charged with six separate a.
sanlts upon the cabin boy, aged 1S
years, a: dilf4rant intervals during
tn, voyags from Newcastle to Ho-
nolulu. The prosecution ahan-
doued two of the counts during the
trial and OF the remaining four,
three we're charged as happening
the second day out and the fourth
about three weeks thereafter. The
sole eye witnes ,es to these assaults,
according to the cabin boys state
ment, then in the Territory, were
the defendant and first mate. These
two denied the charge in toto. The
prosecution also introduced in cor.
roboration of the charge the evi.
dcnee OF FIVE or six OF the crew, who
swore that at diff-rent times during
the voyage, while located mostly at
the whesl, alone and by themselves,
they heard outcries from the cabin
and the sounds OF blows; the cabin
boy and the captain at the time
supposed to he below. No dates or
times were given with any certainty
for any OF these outcries; nor was
auy Que Of such occurrences cor.
roborated by a second witness; nor
we're these ou.cries connected with
the time or occasion of any one Of
the assaults charged in the indict-
ment. The prosecution also in,ro-
duced the evidence OF two OF the
same witnesses who had testified to
the outcries, to the effect that the
prosecuting witness had twice ex,
hibited black and blue marks on his
back.
The jury were satisfied from the
evidence and the demAanor and the
action of the witnesses that tha
cabin boy aud cr'w had gro sly