The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1902-01-17

ga~sH Win Being Part Of the
United states-other Courts.
The Kamalo case came mp before
Ju5ge Humphreys yesterday morning
On "a motion 20 set the case for hear
ng u more testimony AttOrney
Haukey iuterposed a plea against the
Jurisdiction OF the court Hankey
stated that the proceedings in the
Supreme Court were not part OF
tls record OF the case and that a pro
fu-ma ruling iu the record was desir
cd by The defendants. from Judge
Humphreys. on the question Of mis-
Jurisdiction. The purpose OF getting
such ruling in the record being 10
save the point for appeal TO the
United States Supreme Court
Judge Humphreys said that he was
ready 90 carry ont the order OF the
Territorial Supreme Court TO the
.neg' that be- hear the case. To keep
t0c record straight. however Judge
Humphreys said be would allow time
fa- she preparation OF the plea and
tla matter was postponed until Sat.
grGay morning when a date for hear
rr viii Doe set
Writ Of Mandamus Served.
The writ OF mandamus issued by
fhe Territorial Supreme Court. or
icrlac that Judge Humphreys hear
v,N testimony in the case. has been
served un Judge Humphreys The
xrit is long on and ends with the
order that the case Doe heard. as fol
lows.
Whereas when the hearing OF said
appeal was reached in this Court the
q tendauts prs scented motion 20 this
Court praying that this cause be re-
Eaudad 10 a judge of the Circuit
raurJ for further hearing and
Whereas said motion was heard
md decided by this Court demanding
said cause TO the Circuit Judge Of the
first Judicial Circuit with instyuc-
tious 10 receive such evidence as may
- ohered under the amendments 10
the pleadiugs and for such further
proceedings as may be proper. And
Whereas on the 18th day Of De
rember \. ID 1901 the plaintiffs by
tbcsr attorneys appeared before YOU
Tor the purpose OF proceeding with
the hearing of this cause under said
decision ~ this Court and
Whereas az said time and place
you refused 20 pyoeeed with the near
ing OF said cSase in accordance with
our said decision, and
= Refused 10 Proceed.
whereas. heretofore to wit. on the
18th DAY Of December. \. u. 1901. 1t
appeared upon the complaint of L.
n Dee one OF the plaintiffs in this
action. that you did refuse to proceed
With the hearing OF said cause IN
accordance with the decision Of this
court. whereupon this Court at the
Instance OF said /. H. Dee granted a
rule requiring you 10 show cause, II
any you had among other things. why
a preemptory writ OF mauiamus from
thjs Court should not be awarded and
issued 10 you commanding you 10 re-
ceiye such evidence as may be Of
fered the amendments 70 the plead
tugs and 10 take such further pro
reediuss in this cause as may be
consistent with the views expressed
i'm said decision Of this Court And
Whereas NJ a session OF said SUI
preme Court held az Honolulu in Jan.
1a-y. 1902 You certified and returned
-o said Supreme Cour, together with
said rule that the alternative writ
issued by this Court did not state
mCts sufficient 90 eutitle the pe;i.
uoners 20 the relief sought
The Peremptory, Writ.
Whereas afterwards. 10 Wit. at the
same session 81 this court last afore-
said upon consideration OF your said
return and Of the cause shown by
ron therein against the said rule be-
ing made absolute. aud against the
awarding and issuing Of the said writ
u mandamus. and upon consideration
Jf Ne arguments OF counsel. as we'll
"a your behalf. showing cause as
aforesaid as on behalf OF the said
plaintiffs in support OF the said rule
4 Was considered by this Court that
you had certified and returned 20 the
said Cour; an insufficient cause for
having refused 70 receive sucn evil
denee as might be offered under the
amendments 20 the pleadings in said
action aud 70 take such further pro
seedings as may be consistent with
gRe views expressed in the aforesaid
decision Of the Court and agsinS; ihe
awarding and issuing OF the said wri'
81 mandamus pursuant 10 the rule
aforesaid. and il was also then AMI
there and shere considered by the