The Hawaiian gazette., 1904-05-03
GUILTY ON
ALL COUNTS
-Jurymen Found MeheuIa
Destroyed Public
Documents.
tFrom Saturdays Advertiser)

Two verdicts of guilty were found
against Solomon Meheula, under his
first indictment for destroying public
documents, in the Federal court yester-
day afternoon. Judge Dole read the
yerdicts aloud himself instead of hand
ing them to the clerk after examining
them.
The first verdict found the defend
ant guilty as charged in the indictment,
and had p. S. saying that the jury
recommended him to the clemency of
the court. In the second form the jury
found the defendant guilty on each of
the four counts in the indictment,
'categorically, every time signing by the
foreman, Robert b. French, as in the
general verdict.
The jury had been considering it's YER
dict from II o'clock until PAS, but at
II O'Clock the Jurors were allowed by
consent of court and counsel to be con-
Quoted to the Alex. Young Hotel for
lunch in charge of Deputy Marshal F.
L. Winter. After returning from re-
freshment the jury once sought and re-
ceived additional instructions.
j. w. Cathcart, acting for c. w. Ash
ford. counsel for defendant, who had
left for the Island of Hawaii, moved
that the jury be polled, which being
done each juror declared that what had
been rendered was his verdict. Then
counsel noted exceptions to both the
verdict of guilty and the rendering of
two forms of verdict. Mr.. Cathcart
then preferred a request on behalf of
Mr.. Ashford that sentence be deferred
until his return.
Judge Dole complied, fixing May 9 as
the date for sentence. For the offense
of which Meheula has been convicted,
the penalty is either fine not to exceed
$4,000 or imprisonment not to exceed
three years at hard labor or both fine
and imprisonment. AS in the Tesla
case, 1t is understood that the District
Attorney will not ask for more than
the minimum penalty upon Meheula.
The enforcement of United States laws
that have not parallels in Hawaiian
laws is begun with the intent of giving
such laws an educative effect with the
least possible degree of severity. If
the earlier examples made fail in due
effect, as Judge Dole intmated when
sentencing Tesla, the weight of the
laws hand will be increased.
Mr.. Ashford, who was present at the
giving of the case to the jury, refrained
iioiii IL SioSiiS iudIeSSB lepltSellllHS
that there was no eliminating evidence
against which argument was needed.
j. j. Dunno, Assistant District At
torney, took nothing for granted but
methodically presented the case to the
jury on behalf of the United States.
Among the instructions he submitted to
the court which were given, the jury
was informed that proof of physical de-
struction, such as by tearing up or
burning, was not necessary for con-
victing an officer of destroying public |
documents. The charge under this head |
went on to say:
IF you find from the evidence in this |
case, beyond a reasonable doubt, that, |
at the times and places in the various |
counts in this indictment mentioned, or |
at the time and place in any one or
more of said counts mentioned, this de-
PENDANT was Clerk of the House of |
Representatives of the Territory of Ha-
wall, and that, at such times and |
places, or such time and place, there |
was deposited with him as such Clerk |
any voucher or vouchers calling for
the disbursement of the public funds
of this Territory; and that, upon such
voucher or vouchers, this defendant
issued, or drew warrants upon the
Treasury of this Territory, and that
such warrants were presented to said
Treasury and by it paid, and that this
defendant did away with such vouch-
er or vouchers so as to prevent their
delivery to the Secretary of the Terri
tory; then / charge you that it will
be your duty to convict this defendant
upon all, or any one, or more than one
of said counts as you may determine
from the evidence, Notwithstanding that
you may not have before you direct
evidence, of the actual tearing up or
burning of such vouchers"