The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-06-25
ONE YEAR
FOR EACH
Sentence Passed
BY Judge De
Bolt.
KumaIae and Johnson's
Last Chance Taken
By Appeal.
The Court Discusses Advertiser
Article and Legislative Rascal
ity - MahauIu Pleads.


convicted of conspiracy, were sentenc-
| ed by Judge De Bolt each to be i'm
| prisoned at hard labor for one year and
| to pay fine of $3.50, the latter repre-
senting one-half of the costs of prose-
cution. The offense charged was that
of conspiracy to defraud the Territory
of $312.50 in the guise of expenses Of the
House of Representatives special COM
mittee on the Chinese fund
| Previous to sentence the court denied
a motion for a new trial. When de-
PENDANTS were asked if they had any
| thing to say why sentence should not
be passed upon them, they motioned
| toward their counsel and said he would
speak for them.
| C. w. Ashford, counsel for defendants,
argued that the evidence showed gross
| cheat and not conspiracy, if it proved
anything, and claimed that the penalty
should be pronounced as for the less
serious offense. Then the Sattorney
called attention to what he designated
persecution" of the defendants by the
Advertiser, saying he was not only re-
ferring to attacks upon them prior to
the trial but, particularly, to an edi-
torial in the previous days issue of the
Advertiser, wherein he said the Judge
of that court was sought to be threat
ened and cajoled, bullied and fiattered,
into ;pdictipp ceptaDca moro severe
than he might otherwise inf1ict." Mr..
Ashford considered such methods in
decent and outrageous-an outrageous
attempt to influence court of Justice
Attorney General Andrews, replying,
said in effect that nobody could imagine
that any public officer including the
court and himself, was going to be
swerved from his duty by what might
be said in the newspapers. If a news
paper aided in ferreting out crime and
ascertained certain facts, it seemed to
him that it had the privilege of pub |
fishing the facts. He said this latter
in reply to Mr.. Ashford's statement !
that jurors on their examination adj |
mitted that they had been Influenced |
by articles in the Advertiser.
1t was a painful duty that devolved !
on him, the Attorney General said, in |
prosecuting two men whom he knew /
we'll and had been on good terms with |
Yet it was his duty to ask for a severe ,
sentence, as the defendants were men /
of ability and education who must have |
fully realized the gravity of the offense |
they were committing.
Judge De Bolt paid attention first to :
the newspaper article of which counsel
for defendants had complained. He
spoke of the press as powerful for both .
good and evil. The editor responsible
for the article, he went on to say, must
ave intended either to injure the de-
4endants or to insult the trial judge.
AS to the former motive, he said the
defendants would not be injured by the
article, for if it could have any influ-
ence with him the effect would be to
modify his determination of admins
tering strict justice. Taking the other
view of the article as concerning him
self. he would pass it over without no
tice.
With regard to the prime matter be-
fore the court, Judge De Bolt referred
TO the notorious frauds disgracing the
two last legislatures. 1t was necessary
to purge the legislative halls if there
was to be any hope for these islands.
KumaIae. as a member of the Legis-
ature, had taken an oath to guard the
interests of the people who gave him
the trust. Competency and absolute
honesty were two essentials of legis-
ator, but of these competence could
more safely be spared than honesty.
If there were not some competent and
honest men in the Legislature, though Z
all too few, he did not know where the
country would be today.
Johnson was a man of intelligence
md ability a member of the bar who
must have known and appreciated the
,vil of the course on which he was set
ing out.
The verdict of the jury the court felt
vas absolutely correct. and the IMPOSE
ion of a fine would be a quite made
,uate punishment. 1t was the sentence ,
# the court that each defendant should q,
,e imprisoned at hard labor for one
7ear and pay a fine equal to half the :
osts of prosecution. The costs We're
alter taxed at $3.50 against each de- :
endant.
Mr. Ashford was granted thirty days {
or obtaining a transcript OF the evil I
ence in which to file bill of excep- /
ions. t
Bail on appeal was fixed at $1,000 for I
ach defendant, and Kumalae and I
ohnson We're taken into custody until (
UGH should be furnished. /
MAHAULU PLEADS.
Stephen Mahaulu, former chief clerk
n the Land Office, yesterday morning ;
headed not guilty TO his three indict- 9
1ents for embezzIement. and the cases b
we're continued till the September '
ERIN.