The Hawaiian gazette., 1909-08-24
CONSP|RATO RS
SENTENCED
TO JAIL
(From Sundays Advertiser.)

Ten months in Honolulu Jail, without |
hard labor, and $500 fine is the SEN
tence imposed by Judge De Bolt yes
terday morning on Maxine Higginbo-
than, Y. Sega, NJ. Negoro and Y. Ia.
saka, the four Japanese strike.leaders
who were convicted of conspiracy in
the third degree.
Sentence was imposed after nearly
the whole morning had been taken up
by Attorney Lightfoot in argument in
support of his motion for an arrest of
judgment. Judge De Bolt first over
ruled the motion and then, on motion
of Attorney General Hemenway, sem
fenced the four defendants.
The sentencing of the men, however,
10y no means ends the case. Lightfoot
has noted an appeal to the Supreme
Court, and in the event that the judg-
ment of the Circuit Judge is confirmed
By that tribunal, he says that he will
appeal to the Supreme Court of the
United States on constitutional
grounds.
Lghtfoot s motion for an arrest of
Judgment was based on a contention
that the conspirators were not legally
convicted, that the court had no juris-
diction in the matter because the men
were tried on an information sworn to
bv High Sheriff Henry instead of on
an indictment by the grand jury.
All the way through the trial the
contention of the prosecution has been
that the offense of which the four men
were accused is a misdemeanor. Light
foot, in his argument for an arrest of
Judgment contended that conspiracy,
no matter whether of the first, second
II 81 =. al g1o1~1 Ia
with imprisonment at hard labor, which
constitutes it an Infamous crime. The
Constitution of the United States spe-
cHcallv provides that no man may be
tried for an infamous crime except up
on an indictment by the grand jury.
Therefore, Lightfoot claimed, the trial
of Maxine. Negoro, Sega and Tasaka
on mere information was not legal
and the verdict should be set aside.
Callen VS.. Wilson, 127 U. 81
The argument hinged, therefore, up
on whether the men had been found
guilty of a misdemeanor or of felony.
Lightfoot in his argument stated
that, although it had not been shown
that his clients had conspired to COM
nit felony, there was nothing to
prevent the jury from bringing in a
verdict to that effect if it wanted to
that the verdict might have been
guilty of conspiracy in the first as well
as of in the third degree, and that
therefore the crime of which his clients
were accused constituted a felony, and
hence the court had no jurisdiction in
the matter and was bound to set the
verdict aside.
The attorney cited many authorities
in support of his motion, which was
based on other grounds. as well as the
one mentioned, containing in all nine
points. as follows
l. The court was without jurisdic'
ton as defendants had been tried with
out Indictment by grand jury con-
trary to the United States Constitution
9 Defendants did not have the
speedy and impartial trial by jury
of their district which the constitu'
ton guaranteed.
8. The verdict was contrary to the
provision of the constitution that the
trial of all crimes, except in cases OF
impeachment. shall be by jury.
q. The verdict was contrary to the
Organic Act provision requiring the
unanimous verdict of a jury.
5. Defendants were not informed OF
the nature of the charge against then
in accordance with the constitution.
G. Defendants were compelled to hi
witnesses against themselves contrary
to the constitution.
7. Evidence was received which hac
been procured in contravention of tn
provision of the constitution which
guaranteed persons from seizure o.
their private papers without process o.
law.
8. Evidence was received in contra
vention of the treaty between the Uni
ted States and Japan, which provide,
that the residences and places of bust
ness of the citizens or subjects of eth
er country within the territory OF tn
other should be respected.
o. Defendants were denied the equa
protection of the laws in several re
spects set forth. The last one was tina
The verdict was contrary to the Law
and the evidence and the weight OF eVi
dence.
The prosecution was heavily repre-
scented in court. there being presen
Attorney General Hemenway, Deput
Attorney General Andrews, Count
Attorney Cathcart, Deputy County Al
torney Milverton, and special prose
cutors Prosser and Ballou. Prose-
however. was the only one who too
any part in the proceedings, He di
not argue on Lightfoot' IS motion fo
an arrest of judgment, II being vi
necessary that he should, but he inte'
rupted the attorney for the defens
several times, greatly to the annoy
ance of the latter, who, on severn
occasions, told the special prosecute
TO keep still and not bother hin
These passages at arms were rattle
heated and both lawyers raised the
voices until the windows ratified, Will
the Judge merely smiled-and the
called them both down. Prosser mad
reference 10 Lightfoot's former vocl
ton of school teaching, and LightfoC
retortcd by likenlng Prosser 20
small school boy who did not kno
how 10 behave All Of which, how
ever, settled no points Of law.
Al the conclusion of Lghtfoot