The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1905-02-23
IN THE HOUSE


Public instruction sent Boo fuI Dist
Of school teachers iu the Territory toe
gether with record of the certificates
held by each. Secretary Rogers of
the Public instruction department sent
In q list Of employees other than teach
ers. Reports as to employees and sail
aries were also sent In by Treasurer a.
J. Campbell, Chief Engineer Thurston
OF the Honolulu Fire Department O. L.
Sorenson of the Survey Department
and President Pmkham of the Board
Of Health. They were ordered print
ed.
A letter from Secretary Callahan Of
the Trades and Labor Council asking
for copies Of an bills introduced was
filed.
Rep. Andrade presented a report of
the judiciary Committee on the letter
of G. A. Davis i'm which the latter ask
ed to have a reference to his case ex-
plunged from the new Revised Laws of
Hawaii.
The report was to the effect that it
could not do anything towards advis-
! ing the striking out of the reference TO
the case. The Code Commission had
only done its duty in making the refer
ence. He moved the adoption Of the
report.
! Rep Coelho disagreed with the re-
! port He thought grave injustice had
| been done a citizen by the reference
| to the Davis case. He thought that the
/ Code Commission should have reported
the decision of the United States Court
and by the Department of Justice in
the case i'm point The Supreme Court
had found Davis guilty but the L. $.
Court had eXonerated him, and it was
due to Davis that the facts as stated
should be quoted He moved that the
report be tabled. Only Rep. Kaniho
I supported the motion.
In speaking to the main motion to
adopt the report Rep. Smith contended
that the Code Commission had only
acted in accordance with it's instruc-
tons It had not been instructed to
compile notes as to official communica-
tions from the Department of Justice
or any other source. II was expressly
instructed to compile notes only from
cases appearing in Hawaiian reports.
The Code Commission had merely done
what the law said it should do i'm quot
ing the Davis case. He seconded the
motion that report be adopted.
Rep. Aylett asked why the names of
the other lawyers concerned i'm the case
We're not mentioned.
Rep Holstein thought the judiciary
Committee should have conferred with
the Bar Association before reporting
He wanted to see that Davis, as well
as every one else, got fair play.
Rep. Harris thought that the request
of George A. Davis was a fair one
Davis asked for an investigation before
the act was passed, had the judiciary
Committee given Davis a chance to be
heard?
Rep. Andrade replied that it was not
within the province OF the Committee
to hold such an investigation. The case
had been adjudicated upon by the court
of last resource and nothing that the
Committee could do could alter it,
Rep. Harris insisted that Davis
should have been given hearing and
moved the report back to the commit
tee.
Rep. Andrade strongly opposed such
action. If the Judiciary Committee
was to give Davis "A hearing it would
be necessary to have all the witnesses
present who appeared before the SUI
preme Court. He deprecated any med
ding with the work of the Supreme
Court by the House.
Rep. Aylett supported the motion to
refer the report back. The matter
should have been enquired into thor
oughly before the Committee reported,
both sides should have been heard.
Rep. Sheldon believed the report
should be adopted as it was not VITA
DIN the province of the House to revise
any decision Of the Supreme Court
Rep. Long thought that Davis de-
served a fair hearing.
Rep. Holsteln moved the previous
question, but Rep. Smith protested
that he wished to be heard on the mat
ter and Rep, Holsteln Withdrew.
Rep. Smith objected to Holstein's
characterizing his remarks as de-
fence of the Code Commission He be-
lieved that the Davis and Sumner mat
ter was a closed incident and that ev-
eryone should be glad that it was clos
ed 1t would be better for everybody
concerned If It remained closed. The
Code Commission had done its duty by
referring to a certain case which had
come before the Supreme Court He
asked what Mr.. Davis could possibly
be heard on by the judiciary Commit
tee. Nothing that Davis could say
would change the decision of the Su-
preme Court.
Here Rep. Smith read the decision i'm
the Davis case as rendered by the Su-
preme Court.
Rep. smith contended that the Com
mittee had acted with absolute correct
ness in reporting as It had.
Rep. Coelho returned to the attack
on the ground that Davis should have
fair play, but Rep. Greenwich failed to
see how the Committee could do any
thing towards rightlng what Davis
considered to be a wrong I'm the light
Of the Supreme Courts decision.
BY vote Of IA to 10 the motion to