The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-05-31
NN JILLIAM II. MARSHALL stant

vousness he stood. hat In hand. before
the bench Prison stared him In the
face The crime charged. TO which he
had pleaded guilty. might be punished
with a years imprisonment and two
thousand dollars hne. lie had no
less he showed no trepidation and
looked Judge odiin squareiy In the eye
during the reading OF the sentence
His attention was respectful. there
was no braggadocIo In his attltud,-no
cringing. He merely came as an hon
est man should To admit his mistake
and abide by the ruling OF the court
Ills attorney. Judge Terrell. In a
brief. forceful statement entered the
plea OF guilty. He stated that the al
iegcd Ilbelous article was not directed
AGAINST Judge Rohde. It's shaft had
been aimed at the old Spanish libel
law Judge Terrell stated that his
client had no acquaintance with Judge
Rohds. that II had been fnrthest from
his intention. when writing the article.
20 reflect on the iatter's character. His
attitude had merely been that OF an
independent American fighting what he
considered 10 be an unjust law
Prosecuting Attorney Major Bishop.
Ia answer To Judge Terrell. compli-
mcnted Mr.. Marshali's attitude. and
stated that he believed that Il should
be taken Into consideration by the
court when making n finding: siin he
felt that the punishment should be Sc
we're enough To- establish an example
that would warn others against COM
hitting the same transgression- There
has been too much OF this kind of rot
published In Manila" exclaimed the
Prosecuting Attorney. and although
this particular article did not do Judge
Rohde one whit OF harm. still De-
iieve this court must take into consid-
Grafton the precedent that this case is
bound TO establish. Judge Rohde's
continued the Prosecuting
Attorney. must also be taken into
He IL not In n position
To go 10 this mans Office and horse-
whip him as the ordinary Individual
would. He must seek other recourse"
Major Bishop then assaiied harshalrs
excuse that he had not Intentionally
attacked the honesty OF Judge Rohde.
He read the following sentence from
TIE llbeicus article: 1T 10 a damrabie
stain on the Judge who inflicted g."
and said: IF the defendant had APP
peared In court 90 present a plea of
insanity. it would have been better
than such n paltry excuse In the caoe
Of this prosecution"
Judge odlln then read his sentence
"a follows:
DID NOT INJURE JUDGE RoHDE.
You have plead guilty TO violating
n - 90 30 III 81
States Philippine Commission wherein
II Is provided that every person who
and with n malicious intent to
injure another publishes or procures
to be published any libel shall be pun
lshed by fine OF not exceeding two
thousand dollars. or imprisonment not
exceeding one year or both. The Ian
Euage used b. you was entirely IN
and unwarranted. and In
the opinion Of the court without any
explanation would deserve a very Sc
we're punishment. You saw 1T To print
in q newspaper under your control
very violent words against n promI-
rent Official OF the Government. which
" bile Il did not injuTc him in the least.
might very well have that effect
among people who dld not know him. !
such language would
Eyes % the people In the Philippine /
Islands ~ Il we're 10 go unpublished /
The natural conclusion OF the Filipino /
people would be either that the Gov
eminent was afraid OF the newspapers I
~ that the Government was not pre-
pared 20 stand behind Its own courts. /
JUDGE SAYS LAW WAS HARSH. |
The very unpleasant duty now de-
folvcs upon me OF imposing n sentence !
ipOn you. and / am inclined to lay n 4
great deal OF stress upon the state
nenta OF your counsel that the fact
hat you did not know Judge Rohde
md the fact that the real purpose
which actuated your mind was disgust
md I might say n violent feeling OF
iatred against n law which has since
'een repealed by this same government
which put this same Judge in Office.
IN frank TO say that / myself think
he law under which Judge ROhde act
d vas very harsh law. and I agree
With you In that respect. but YOU over
ooked the fact that 10 would be unfair
o apply law 10 facts which facts an
edate the change In the law. and you
nay be thankful that the law which
'ou yourself complained OF in this
ewspaper has itself been repealed. and
hat your case Is 10 be tried by the
ew standard.
AMERICANISM TOO ACUTE.
propose to infiict upon you n pun
'hment which consider extremely
ght. and I do II for three reasons In
he first place the Government that
ou were attacking Is the Government
Z the United States. and you are q
itizen OF the United States. and IL any
-iticism whatever Is To be placed up
"a your citizenship 4; Is that your
.mericanism Is too acute. You are
nxious In your newspaper. as IL seems
, me. to accomplish In a day what
BILE men are trying to do by years OF
ard labor. History shows that IL Is
npossible tor the sovereignty OF a nu-
ierous population and for the laws
hlch govern that nation. TO suddenly
iange. These changes must be grad
al: history proves that. The disease
on are suffering from Seems TO me to
? that OF acute Americanism. ard you