The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1904-04-01
REDUCTIONS IN
THE JUDICIARY
JUDGE ROBINSON WOULD DROP
tNTERPRETERS AND cur OUT
ALL JURY FGEs.

Judge Roblnsons recommendation
for reductions Of expenses IN the judi
clnry department contain some very
radical suggestions, lie would do
away with all snlnHod interpreters ox-
copt ono Hawaiian ana would abandon
the jury fee system, In "a letter 10 the
governor giving his ylows the Judge
says
"fhoro IN another matter not alluded
10 In the statement In which by means
Of appropriate Legislation ut lonst $780,
900 por nnnum could be- saved to the
Territory, ! alludo 10 the expense In
Cldont 10 the Payment Of the fees Of
both grand ana trial Jurors by Act t.
lGNlrn Session 1908, there was npproprl-
nled by Tho Legislature for the use Of
The Supreme ana Circuit Courts, during
The FIRST six months Of the yenr 1903,
the sum ~ gls,260 and This amount
WIS fuzzy expended during the period
specified ~ lenst ninoty per cent Of II
being used IN pnymont Of jury fees,
ana the amount thus expended was not
unusunl the nyernge annual cXpon-
dlluro for jury fees being between $780,
900 ana $4,000,
rs u matter Of fact there exists no
reason why the Territory should pay
any jury fees, n h incumbent upon
every cltlzon OF % Btnto or Territory
10 uphold the courts In their criminal
Jurisdiction and 10 nld IN enforcing the
penHl stntuloB " such BtnteB or Ter
rll0ry fOr the common benefit Of the
community Of which he forms an In
togrnl part The service rendered by
10 citizen ns q juror IN ~ criminal case
IN merely the performance " a duty
incumbent upon him nB citizen, and
The discharge ~ this duty may be- rec
qulred NJ him In criminal cnso with
ont compensation or consideration, 9TH
er Than his duty ~ a citizen, ~ fully
ana 10 the mne extent as ho could be-
required ~ serve upon posse cOmltn-
Ne NJ the instance NJ the sheriff.
nm clyll cases the benefit 10 be- de-
rived by q trial by jury lnuros solely
10 the lltlgants ana there rs no reason
why the Territory should bear the ex-
pense incident 10 trial Wy jury IN Il
olyll case 10 which II Is not u party.
no require lltlRnDts I'm % clYl case 20
bear the expense incident 10 trial by
or proceedings, III not IN violation Of
Article VII Of the Constitution " the
United Btntos, providing that IN suits
at common law, whore the value IN
controversy shall exceed twenty dol
lars, the right Of trial by jury shall be
preserved, for the reason that parties 10
such action Or suit are not deprived Of
the right Of trial by jury merely be-
cause they nre required ~ pay the eK-
penses Incident 10 such n trial
nm the great Btnte Of California,
with its practically unlimited resources
ana immense wealth, the practice Of
requiring Jurors 10 serve In criminal
Cnses without compensation ana Of rec
qulrlBR ltiRants IN ciyil cases 10 pny
the expenses Incident 10 d trial by jury,
each party advancing the fun amount
N jury fees FOR The dny NJ the CONE
uenGement N each dHy Of the trial,
thxlng the amount 80 expended ~ costs
against the unsuccessful party, per-
hitting him ~ Withdraw the amount
deposited by him "a the conclusion Of
the trial has obtained for a number
N yeafs and ~ workings have been
mhrked with unqualified success II
may BE- objected thnt such a practice
results 10 the disadvantage " TIE
poor man VINO ,is unable m advance
the necessary amount N the trial h
~ ~ prOtfacted But there ~ no merit
IN the ObpectOB, as he n not Obliged 10
demand n trial ny Jury ma n n not
~ be supposed Tor moment that h.
would not receive equal, eKact ana sub
slaHtlal Justice n he we're 10 submit
HE ease ~ d court sitting Without o.
| jury
nm my opinion there n 40 occasion
fOr my legislation IN regard ~ this
matter ns there never has existed ana
does not now exist my statute roqulr-
ihg the Territory N Hawaii ~ pay the