The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-08-07
FOR THIEF
WheeImen Must Be
Protected by
Court.

Stephen Lake, who pleaded guilty
| to the stealing OF a bicycle valued at
$50, was sentenced to Oahu prison for
| term of six months by Judge Gear yes
terday morning, who at the same time
| gave a warning to all bicycle thieves
The defendant, a Hawaiian boy. said
that he had simply picked up the wneeI
in the street, and had no intention OF
stealing it, but the story told by Ed
Deekum, the prosecuting witness, as re-
Hated by Mr.. Douthitt to the Court. did
not agree with the defense. This was
that the bicycle had been left in a door
way on Merchant street, and when
search was afterwards made IL was
finally discovered in japanese cycling
shop where the defendant was trying
to sell II, having filed away the number
| OF the machine.
ut seems to me-" said the Court,
that bicycle stealing deserves as Sc
we're punishment aS horse steahng,
which was formerly punishable by
hanging. This practice OF stealing bi-'
cycles should be discouraged. 1 try TO
be az lenient as possible with HaWaiian
BOYS when they are before me, but 1
must do my duty"
Judge Kaulukou, who appeared Tor
defendant, pleaded for leniency, claim
ing that the people here are not an
angels and they should not be so tempt
led. He asked for suspension or SEN
|tence This Deputy Attorney General
Douthitt said he could not con5cien-
tiously recommend, and the Court pro-
cee6ed to sentence, saying that ne
wanted to be merciful 20 those VINO
appeared before him, ard imposing
sentence of six months in prison. Judge
Kaulukou interrupted to ask the Court
To reconsider and impose fine, call
ling attention to the action OF Judge
Gear in filming the assailants OF the aged
Hawaiian $25 each. He said also that
he had heard the evidence in the lower
court in the assault case. and that 1T
showed it to have been an aggravated
offerse. Judge Gear replied that the
attorney should have called the matter
to his attention Tuesday when CANA
L CHER. Campion and Hartman were up
for sentence, and he would not have
been SO lenient. eff the proper show
ing is made now I will set aside that
sentence. This sentence of six months
will have to stand
THE JURY WORK.
TWO jury trials were had in criminal
leases before Judge Gear yesterday In
the case OF Kaha, charged with ma
licious injury. In throwing rocks at
Chinese house, a verdict of guilty was
returned. Andrews appeared as special
counsel for the prosecution.
The case of Enoch Johnson and Ioela
was taken up the first thing in the aft
|ernoon, and a jury impanelled- The
two hoys are charged with having as
|saulted couple of girls near Chinese
store at Iwilei. They claim in defense
that the girls applied offensive epithets
10 them The case had not been con-
Guided at the time of court adjourn
ment.
DISTRICT COURT APPEALS.
Appeals from Judge Dickey have been
filed in the following cases:
Jose Castros VS. j. NJ. Vivas, action
for recovery of 800 which Vivas is al
legged to nave collected upon a cash
bond in police court and retained as at
torney's fee Judgment for plaintiff.
Jesse Makafnae VS.. Goo Wan Hoy, on
note Case dismissed because of fail
ure to stamp notes and appeal taken to
Supreme Court
f. W. Christensen VS.. f. b. F'riel,
suit for money advanced for purchase
Of poultry.
James Carly VS.. ]. H Nunes. suit for
s17T. 90 for material food and advances.
A NJ. Brown VS.. Hawaiian Supply
Co, suit on bond for $500, which de-
PENDANT IS alleged 10 nave NlOldltO-
J. F. Hamburg VS.. A NJ. Brown, high
sheriff, suit for $42.50 on execution.
Judgment for defendant.
J. A. Nunez VS.. James Carly. JudS-
ment for plaintiff for $2l4.S7; suit on ac-
count.
Young Amin VS.. A. NJ. Brown, suit for
$500 for damages by reason of execu-
zion. Verdict for defendant.
Hawaiian Electric Co. VS.. VIII Z.
King. This was a suit for electric light
furnished since January, King having
ordered his meter taken out in Febru-
airy because the rate was increased.
Verdict for defendant.
r. W. Quinn VS.. Victor HOFFMAN.
Suit for 1855 for board, newspaper SUBJ
scription. etc. Judgment for plain
tiff.
Shimoda Sentaro VS.. zee Wo. Suit
for $3.50 for goods and chattels sold and
delivered
Lo kai alias Yee Wo VS.. Shimoda
defendant asks judgment for $500.
$40 A on note
MAKES COUNTER CLAIM.