Hawaii Holomua, Volume III, Number 138, 14 June 1894 — CONTEMPT. [ARTICLE]

CONTEMPT.

I Aldrich in Ihe Toi!s, Castle Not Out of TheziL ► | Messr* AKlricli, C«stle anl Ho’gs npp«ired li)is moroing m tbe Cīrcait Coart vitb their respeotĪTe coariSels k» show wby thev sbouM not be panisbed fur bsv:ag «hown tbeir coi:t«(Dpt of Conrt. Jn Jge Wi>iting presided. nfter a while, un>l g«ve hu deci--ion on tte Aldncb c,-se Tbe r Jndge wen_t brirfiv over tu»-eaae wbich b;«d can»»?d tbo eikilīon «»f A!dricb for eont» mpt Tue C >art had issu«d ..n order of ne ex*nl •ginist tl»e r**sponileiit, who tlien nus found on board tbe brig L' A»eiiiier at tlie t<me wiien the v. —> 1 was r> i Jy to h-H\e the h*rb *r. .«ad tue Jefemlint was f >aud , bidJen in tbe l «z»rette, nnd bis elaim tbat he was ou boar.l t<» seo tl»e C.«ptiin,anl only bid birat»elf in u “jokiug” manoer, con!d not be c<»Qsidered. An onler of j tbe C >urt was not a j<ike. Tbe C*»urt found Aldrich goilty of i couterapt, ar.d order«*d him imprisoned in O.ihu J»il f r n terra of thiitv days. C W Ashfurd. counsel for respondent pr.>posed to take out a writ of haUa» cnrj>u*, as be c->usidered everytinng in tlie matter illegd fi »m tbe writ of «e ex*at t<> tlie i >•;- t‘inpt case. Tbe jndge ->t.ilcd tiiat Mr. Aldricb wouid have a!l opportunity t<» tako whatever st»p he s tw fit, an»l won!d n'»t issi;e tbe warraut before tbis ufternOon. The origtual case ag.iiust Aldrich v»as cont:nued on mi»tion of Mr. Hartweli umil the case of eou terapt has beeu purg«d. The caso for coutempt «g iiust Mi. H N. Cast!e, the editorof tne P. C. Advertiser, and Mr. F. Hor»gs, ou the st.«tf of tlie s;«rae puper wus then called. Mr. A-h-ford appeared for tho eomplainaut, AKlneii, and . R. C »8tte appeared for tiio newsp.iper meu. A wnlten answer to the cit.»tion was filed by counsel f«»r «IOieuse. uud after sume spairing betweeu the l.»wyers editor Castl« was e «iied on tbe stand. Mr. Cas*.le admitted bis legai responsibiiity for ever3’tbing whieli «ppears in the Advertiser, but in regard to tbe art c!e in question he ileuieu auy kuowledge of i*lie ai<tborship, or how it got into tbe i<aper. Hh !i «d left his oiiiee betweeu 9 and llo’eloek tbut evening. aud at thal tuue the art cle was not uroou<L Sinoe , tbe Advertiser had assnmed its large <iimeii8ions. Le Iiadu t reml everythiug ia it previously to pnblicatiuu. Duting liis abseiice Mr. Preston, tlie eity editor bas control. »iurii.g the absence of Pieston, Mr. Hoogs is responsible, Preston is «mler tbe g«nerai sapervision of tbe e»iitor, bnt «n this iust.mce the ohjectionable article had escat»e«l snpervis on After furtber examinatiou Mr. Castld ansvvered to a poiuted questi >u of the C >urt. th «t to the best of his kuowiedge P»estou wrote tiie «rticle. After argn Leats bv* cnuasels, i the Jadge «lisch irged Mr. Hoogs, as notbmg had appeare»l against h>m. aml ti>ok t!ie case of Cistle nnder advis’. nntil he niade up liis mind wbetber Preaton or Castlo wus tbo mnst g iilty.Newspapers in general had the benefit : of a short lecture from His H<>uor. Tbe Jndgewill probab!y mako up bis mind toiK<>r»'Ow.