The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-05-14
ARE AGAIN
ON TRIAL
The Williams Boys
Have Second
Hearing.
MORE NEW SUITS
ARE FILED
Judge Robinson Must Decide the
Admissibiliiy Of Testimony
Refused by Gear.

Robert and Edgar williams. the two
negro boys who are alleged to have
carted of a trunk full of jewelry from
Wards jeweIry store while the police
were watching for them. are being Civ
en- n second trial in the Circuit Court
upon a charge OF larceny in the first
degree.
II will be remembered that at the
trial OF the case before Judge Gear at
the last term OF court. the two defend
ants were acquitted by a jury after
Gear had refused TO allow the admis-
sion as evidence of a confession al
legged to have been made by one of the
defendants. The two men being tried
jointly. the court refused TO allow the
alleged confession made by one defend
ant not in the others presence to go
before the jury. and verdict of ac-
auittaI was returned after but a few
minutes elaboration.
Judge Robinson went against the
same proposition yesterday shortly at
ter the trial was opened and he will
pass upon the question this morning.
After their discharge at the last term
OF court the two men were again ar
rested and Immediately re-indicted by
the grand jury then in session. and
this Is their second trial for the crime.
George Davis was the attorney for the
Williams brothers. having been ap-
pointed by Judge Gear. but when he
was called upon yesterday TO take up
the case he fatty refused to appear in
IL for n second time. Judge Robinson
thereupon appointed c. r. Reynolds as
attorney for the defendants. and he
has been conducting the defense. This
Is Reynolds first appearance in an
action since his admission to the bar
short time ago. and his conduct OF the
case was watched with much interest
by the attaches OF the courts. Rey-
nolds being the official stenographer
In the United States Court.
Ward. the jeweler. from whom the
goods are alleged to have been stolen. |
was the principal witness for the pros |
ecution. on cross-examination he ad- |
mitted that he had knowledge OF the |
intended crime and had taken only his |
usual precautions TO prevent the rob-
berry. The police had received infor-
nation of the contemplated offense and |
placed officers on watch to catch the
burglars In the act. but the trunk con-
tanning about $500 worth OF jewelry
was already In a hack ready to be
carted away when they appeared. The
robbers dropped their booty and fled.
with the officers in hot pursuit. One
u the Williams boys was captured AZ
ter an interchange OF revolver shots
and charged with the robbery. The
other man escaped that night. but on
the following day was captured at Ka-
lihi after an exciting chase through
The lantana bushes.
At the trial yesterday Ward testi-
fed only as 10 the goods stolen. de-
scribing those contained I'm the trunk.
md the jewelry was exhibited to the
Jury. Eugene Paine was put on the
stand to tell OF the conversation be-
tween Williams and Sheriff Chilling
worth. in which the defendant was al
eyed TO have admitted the crime. Mr.
Reynolds objected TO the admission Of a
made by one defendant when
lot in the presence OF the other. and
he matter was argued at some length.
Judge Robinson took the matter under
idvisement and will pass upon the ad-
OF the evidence this morn
ng. Ia
The following is the jury which is
iearing the case: r. w. Houghtailing.
iiram Kalomoku. w. II. Babbitt. E.
l.. X. Sheldon. A. ID. Lar
zach. John A. Legros. F. J. Church. J.
". Akane. James Bicknell, Henry
.erbe. and l. d. Timmons.
THE RAPID TRANSIT CASE.
Argument was had before Judge
yesterday morning upon
notion to strike out part Of defendants
nswer in the case OF sun Kwong Mau
%. vs.. Waikiki Land & Loan Co. ct al III
: scandalous and impertinent. Breck-
ms for plaintiff claimed that the por-
lon az the answer referring to the /
ramways Company. asserting that the
hinese company was not the real
laintir. was improper. Mr.. McClana-
an. appearing for defendant. argued 4
hat the plaintiff did not come into
1urt with clean hands," and was not II
1titled 10 relief: also that this was
IMPLY an attempt to harass the Rapid
ransit Company. Judge Humphreys
ok the matter under advisement
NEW SUITS.
Wong Cha Kin Chui has sued Chin
heon for absolute divorce. The par
IS were married at Hilo on June 5th
90. and defendant Is alleged to have
sserted plaintiff within three months
ter marriage. The petitioner alleges
lat defendant has never contributed
her support. but she has supported
.rself by sewing and from the sale
her clothing. II Is alleged that de-
ndant Is a gambler and an opium 4
noker. and that he has no legitimate
'cupation.
Lui Naahuelua, minor by his
iardian. Kaehu. has sued Kapahi and /
-. II