The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1905-06-09
THE JURORS
HAVE LUNCH
The Territory Has
Got the Bill
For It.

of an hour jury before Judge De Bolt
yesterday found Isabella Bicenti, a
Porto Rican woman, not guilty of sell
ing liquor without license. Deputy
Attorney General Peters prosecuted
and Saml. F. Chillngworth defended.
The jury consisted of H. A. Jucn, F.
w. Macfarlane Jr., Chas. Lambert,
Henry B. Saylor, Job Bachelor, Frank
]. Robello, VIM. p. Roth, chas. G.
Bartlett, VIM. L. Austin, w. L. Lyle, |
Fred. Turrill and James Steiner.
A straight case it would have been
against the defendant but that the
jury disbelieved the evidence tor the
prosecution.
Chas. Hector North, a police inform
err, testified he received $40 for each
conviction he procured and nothing
otherwise. Harry w. Flint, a former
police captain, swore that North was
on the police payroll receiving regular
I pay on the 18th of March. when the Of
Tense was alleged to have been COM
mitted.
Octave Wallace was Porto Rican
who acted as a go-between to buy the
drink from defendant. Exhibits in
court We're q bottle containing some
wine, two demijohns with similar con-
tents and U. S. half dollar of the
mintage of 1900.
Shortly before l o'clock the jury,
having then been out more than one
hour, sent word to the judge that they
wanted lunch. Judge De Bolt returned
message that it was past lunch time.
A few minutes later the jury again
asked for leave to go out, saying they
were willing to pay for lunch them
selves.
The court granted the desired per-
mission and at 2:16, when the jury
rendered their verdict, the bailiff rem
dered a bill of $3.50 for 10 lunches.
THE LIBEL SUIT.
In the $4,000 libel suit of Ballou VS..
Parker, Judge Lindsay's court adj
journed for the day with the plaintiffs
case still on and E. B. McClanahan,
Ballou's former law partner, on the
stand.
Plaintiff got off as witness. after
several days early in the morning.
Fred. Wundenberg, an associate and
attorney intact for the defendant in
connection with the Hawaii ditch busi-
ness, was next called. After him came
the defendant, subpoenaed against
himself.
1t was almost a perpetual fight over
the admission of documents in evil
a duplication of the alphabet with
added symbols wherewithal to identify
them. Exceptions to rulings were so
frequent as thicky to interlard the
record.
In nutshell the fight of the plain
tiff is to show that the accusation Of
bad faith toward client and the i'm
putation of unfitness to practice law.
made by the defendant against the
plaintiff in an affidavit upon record in
the Parker guardianship case, were
unprivileged, presumably malicious and
positively libelous.
On the other hand, so far as the de-
Tense has developed itself in cross-ex-
, animation, the defendant seemingly
will attempt not only to show privilege.
but to set up justification. His attor-
neys have sought to extract admissions
land elicit documentary proof that the
relations of attorney and client did
exist between Ballou and Parker at
the time that the former attacked the
latter's interests in the great irrigation
scheme.
Samuel Parker testified that the OBJ
, noxious affidavit had been signed by
him on the advice of ]. Alfred Magoon
as his attorney. Mr.. Breckons was
overruled in part of his cross question
ing as to the defendants lack of legal
lore. At length he got in this:
you have never made study OF the
law, Col. Parker"
II have not" the answer came al
most eXplosively.
idea, Colonel" Mr.. Breckons blandly
remarked.
Parker stated that letter from Bal
lou demanding a retraction of the af-
fidavit was turned over by him to
Wundenberg for reply.
1t was on this letter that the evil
dence of Wundenberg had chiefly
turned, but after a prolonged combat
of counsel the admission of the epistle
had been refused.
COURT NOTES.
!, Judge Lindsay granted defendants
motion to require plaintiffs to file g
bond In $3.50 for costs on injunction ir
the suit of Koolau Male ct al VS.. ]
o. Carter ct al.
# Judge De Bolt heard argument OF
/. defendants motion for bill of par
ticulars in the case of Territory VS.
Chang All, being present at a gam
bling game" and reserved decision
I Peters for the Territory, Robertson 70
O the defendant.
|,
IS Mr. T. G. Thrum, who has been I'M