The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1904-05-03
REPUDIATES
THE RECORD

A majority of the Supreme Court has
decided to dismiss the writ of error
brought by Tong Kai alias Taing Kai
against the Territory of Hawaii. No
reversible error is found among the
eleven errors assigned to the Circuit
Court, First Circuit.
Plaintiff was convicted of trying to
bride an executive officer, this being
Il. c. Peters, Deputy Attorney General,
by offering him $500 to influence his
official action in respect to gambling
cases that might be given him to ham
die Justice Perry writes the opinion
of the court, Grief Justice Frear sign
ing it with him. Justice Galbraith files
dissenting opinion. ]. A. Matthew
man appeared for plaintiff in error;
NJ. F. Prosser, Assistant Attorney Cen
eral, for defendant in error.
Following is the law of the case as
found by the majority:
I'm the absence of any showing to
the contrary the presumption is that
the grand jurors who found an indict-
ment were good and lawful men and
that not less than twelve concurred in
the finding.
"A person accused of an offense has
no right to appear before or to have
witnesses heard in his behalf by the
grand jury.
"a deputy of the Attorney General
for the Territory is an executive officer
and may decide and act upon matters
that or are brought before him, within
the meaning of Section 255 of the
Penal Laws.
"An attempt by promise of a gift
of money to influence deputy of the
Attorney General for the Territory,
even before the intended commission of
an offense, in his decision and action
concerning the criminal prosecution of
the offender, is punishable under Sec
ton 255 of the Penal Laws.
"A conviction based upon the I'M
corroborated testimony of an accom-
plice is legal.
"A person who has sworn falsely in
case but has not been convicted of
perjury, is not thereby rendered in
competent as witness in a subsequent
case"
OBJECTS TO SPEEDY JUSTICE.
Justice Galbraith makes the follow
ing statement in his dissenting opin-
ion:
Il am impressed with the conviction
that there was great haste exhibited
to land this Chinaman in prison for
some undisclosed reason. The indct-
ment was returned May IA, charging
the alleged offense May 10, and he was
tried and convicted May 81. Whether
or not he was ever arraigned or plead
to the indictment the record here does
not disclose. At any rate there seems
to have been prevalent desire to
speed the defendant along to the reef.
The counsel who then appeared for
him offered very little resistance to the
fulfilment of this desire, in fact the in
ference that he shared in the desire
might be justified from his line of
defense and the feebleness with which
the same was presented
The attorney here abused by Justice
Galbrith is not the same one as pros
ecuted Tong Kai's appeal in the Su-
preme Court, but is one now absent
from the country.
RECORD SAYS OTHERWISE.
With reference to the above state
ment about the record, the clerk of the
Circuit Court has shown an Advertiser
reporter the indictment, which bears
the following endorsements:
Presented this 10Th day of May,
A. d. 1903, and filed this Goth day of
May, A. d. 1908, nunc pro tune as of
May 10, A. d. 1903.
plea: May 20. Reserved until Sat-
urday, May %, A. d. 1903.
Copy of the within indictment hand
ed to the defendant prior to arraign-
ment this goth day of May, A. d. 1903
May 2S-Plea: Not guilty"
-~<S