Hawaii Holomua, Volume III, Number 34, 19 August 1893 — Untitled [ARTICLE]

We arc not in the habit of discu«sinR any ca?e whieh is evb judiee >uid we h*ve as a rule a!w.iys jected to that practiceof the Honolulu paper9, hut when the government tnrongh its Attorny-(īen-eral ehoae? lo appe:ir in the role of a j»ersecutor rather than a prosecu tor, ne have to iguore our ordinnry rule, and openly and public!y denounce tbe action now taken ugiinet Mr. Menry F. P»K)r. Mr. Poor «as charge<i with embez*lementofgovernment money while 9uperi.itendentoftbe PostalSavings Kank nnd after a long and tetlious delay. hewas Gnallyaequitedby the m«*st intellig*ot jury whieh Ius ever served wilhin our memory. The cliurgf*9 roade ngainst birn were pr*ferred und«*r five difforent indictnient' 1 . but e.11 covered the same euhject aml it wou!d have heen expected th*t the government upon the acquitt.il on tne first charge wouid have dropped the ■ others and rricssed Mr. Poor from f«.rther resi>on8ibility. But not so Mr. W. O. Smith our learned At- 1 torny General. Although he tnnst bs awnre t’nt by tbe falling tltrough uf the tirst charge Mr. , Poer stands exonen.led of all criminal inleol or respon8ibility. he jtersist in co:.tinuing what now • apjteare as an ojien j>erBecut5on of a |K>litical ojiponent. Mr. W. O. Smith—the learned Altoruey-Gen-eral —19 not mneh of a lawyer or jurist—..ob«>dy ever 8ccu8ed hiin of U mg lhat—but he migbt have realized that he by his unwurrautaole aelion against Mr. Poor places hiinself «nd his coI!eagues tn the government in a moet unenviable light before tbis community and the e >untry at lnrge. Thecomplaining witnesses 111 the eaee against Mr. Poor have been rcimbursed with the full amount for whieh they uade a elaim. We do not |ir.qxi8e t» look into the justice of the siep laken by the last Legislature, but we eannoi belp reraiuding ; Mr. W. 0. Smitb of ihe facl th*t he fought that elaim of the A*hfords 1 ;tg bilterlv 88 it ever was wiihin the nature of the roember fmm Koloa and Lihue todo at that time claiming that the Ashf »rds , wvre to hlame and Mr. Poor wos being persecuted What a change j has eome over the spint of his | , dreamsl A jury nf this country h*s i 1 now acquitled Mr. Poor. A jury i whieh Mr Smith mnst *dmit wasan | unu8ually intelligent, bonest and j j oonfid«noe-iii8piriug bodj ol men 1 have declared ihat thej do not find Mr. Poor guittj of anj eiime j and we now aak wbj ahou!d all j j former practice in our courta be changed «ud Mr. Poor broogbt up f.Mir Unaa roore on four ebarges whieh virtually h*ve heen decided ■ oo and in bia f*vor bj a jorj? lf ; Mr. Poor had beeo fbuud guillj ; on the firat ebarge woold ihe 1 leamed Atlnrnej-tieneral have prcferred tbc other fbnr charg**a? We unbeeitatingtj aaj, Nu! Mr. Poor wouki batra be«i aenlenced and the chargea dropped. Aod 5 haa alw*ja heen »n tbis and In nnj othcr couotrj. but Mr 9oHtb la devi«tn>g frooi tbb ro»e, we aeppeee p*rtlj, heeaaae Mr. Poor la aa Haweiiaa aod particoUrlj eit aooouai of ble poliiieal «UMllne aod vJew*. Tbe brtef aotkoritj witb wbWr Mr. 8mith STietiet aiūmpi at amng b»

- f nol f.»r one or two more terms, h-eauee an acquittal <*n the «eeonel charge sgatosl him wili if Mr. \\ - 0 Saiith tbe learaed Att rney-G-neral i* o>ns>tent. bring op charg“ N<x 3. 4. and 5, at»d we hardly think, that ihe time will be s<iffici*ent to avilJe ail tbe c-*s»?s at this term. In the meanliine a voUi g uian fj:r!y acquitte*l by a fair a»d h>*n*-sl jury ie put U» a g'eat deal «f ann >yance. worrv īiid exp j nc“*. s : naply, b-Cause be nApjj*ns t» d.ff-r in poht’.cal >•)■■ ws frotc Mr. S>u.t;i and his colle-tgues. Ye«. simply bec*use he ti»s f.»ut.d hitrs-’f unahie l»> his love for lhecountry whieh g»ve him birlh, and «»bere be lias live»J aud wor*ed fn>m c»*il ihood to raanhood. The mfi'iite littleness n{ Mr. Smith aud b:s c*»lle«guee has l>etii agiin etnpha5iied, and n hile «( syiupathize with Mr. P»x>r. we o*n asei>re him lbat the causeof thc pr >viaional goverument h <s n<*t gaiued by ils cruel, unealled difipicab!e perseculion of him.