Newspaper Page Text
rF$mTF"F - ir'
K '''' ..
BISHOP & &. BACKERS
Honolulu, Ilnvrnltnn Ulnnd'.
Dr.tw Exchange on the
JSaiilt ol California, S3. IT.
And their agents in
NEW YORK, BOSTON, HONG HONG.
Messrs. X M. Rothschild &Son, London.
The Commercial Hank Co.. of Sydnoy,
The Commercial Rank Co., of Sjiim-y,
The Hank of Now Zealand: Anckhiiul,
OlirUtchuich, mid Wellington.
Tho 11 ink of IJrltlsh Columhl-i, Vic
lorhi, 15. C. and Fottlnnd, Or.
Transact a Gcuer.il IJnuktng Ravines.
FJ0J30I U nslther GMt nor VMly,
Bat established far tho benefit of all.
bTUDAY, JAN. If., 1885.
THIS EVENING'S DOINGS.
Imp. Older of Rod 31 en, nl 7:30.
Morning Slav Lodge, KofP. 7:800
We make everything else give
way to-day to a rather full lepoit of
the trial for manslaughter in the
Supreme Court. The only com
ment we would make at this time is
to state that the world could scarcely
produce a more decorous and ex
peditious administiation of justice
than the trial of this pasc happily n
rare one in this community.
TRIAL OF BRIDGES.
iiEKOitr. ciiinr JcsTicn .tuih.
F. Horn, sworn, stated: I knew
Bridges and Patten. The hitlci had
made threats against Bridges. On
November 2nd Patten had a private
conversation with me about rent due
on the house occupied by Biidgcs.
I declined to have anything to do
with rent business. Patten then said,
Bridges and his wife must separate,
or I'll separate them, and shoot her.
If I cannot shoot her I'll shoot him
and then shoot myself. Neither of
them shall leave tho beach alive. I
told him I would have nothing to do
with the matter, and requested him
to leave the house. Again on the
10th he met rac, when he asked mo
if I would prevent my daughter from
going away. He said, If she intends
to go away I'll shoot her or him and
then shoot myself. My life is worth
nothing to me without her. 1 told
him he was talking very foolishly. I
went to Watcrhouse's store, and told
him I wanted to settle my little
business with him. He again said.
If j'ou cannot separate them I -will.
He seemed to be almost raving. I
told my family at supper what had
taken place between Patten and my
self. I cannot say that I exactly
warned Bridges against Patleu. I
was in my shop after the shooting
took place. I saw Bridges run inlp
my shop, crying, Oh, save mcl
help Patten. He passed me and
went into another part of the shop.
A policeman came in and told me
some man was shot. Mr. Gibson
afterwards came in and asked for
Bridges. lie told 1110 ho had shot
P.itten. Mr. Gibson found Bridges
in another pait of the building.
Cross-examined: I have known
Patten seven or eight year?. Have
borrowed money of him, perhaps a
dozen times, and he of iuc. We
often lent each other money without
vouchers. Our money transactions
commenced about the lime of the
- outbreak of small-pox. lie wanted
to invest in my business, but V de
clined, not liking paitnorship. lip
let me have money sometimes be
cause ho had no use for it. I paid
no interest, but made an agreement
to pa' him a bonus of one cent on
every pound of sugar used in my
. ,. airs. Horn, sworn : I knew P.itten
mid Bridges. Have hoard Patten
'. make threats against Bridges. Nov.
ljf 2nd, after a funeral, ho asked me if
I had seen Lois (he never called licr
airs. Bridges). IIo said, Is that
Kte man coins: to worlr. J toll von he
'.will never earn a dollar. So help
tiue God, he bhall never earn n dollar
in this town. J reasoned with him,
but he said, 1 will kill Bridges. I
'said, You should not talk like thai,
they arc comfortable, when ho re
plied, I do not like to see that.
Nov. 3rd he came again and mndo
another thicat against Lois. These
threats were talked about at the
family table, when Bridges whs pre
sent. The luteals had effect on
' '..Bridges, he was not jolly over them,
tij lime tue contrary, x saw urn urea
after Iho shooting, ho looked senred,
his hair was standing up I thought
at first thoto was a. fire, until I saw
the police, who told mo Bridges had
shot a man. I said I was very
sorry. I heard Lois say, Oh, my
Godl at the ,samo time pulling her
hands together. There were ccitain
icmark's made, such as, Hang liim,
Get a rope. air. Gibson and a police
man went in and found Bridges.
Cross-examined: I was iu the
store at the lime Bridges ran in, and
air. Horn was in the workshop. 1
did not hear him say anything, air.
Horn did not like Lois marrying air.
Bridges. Patten was. Lois's promised
husband for years.
aits. Sexton, sworn: I know them
both. 1 have heatd threats made
ly Patten. Heard him make a
threat Nov. 2nd. The following day
he telephoned to me, and I went
over to the store to see him. lie
said, I hear the- are going away.
J will not let them go away alive.
He sent again for me Nov. 4th, and
said, I'll give you $500 and pay your
expenses to California and back, if
you will take away Btidges and his
brats. I refused to do so. He then
asked me if I knew anyone who
would. He again threatened to kill
them both. These threats mado
Bridges uneasy but ho did not say
Cross-examined: I have lived
with the Horns over fourteen years.
Have known Patten coming to the
house four or five years. lie often
came into the store and chatted with
airs, and aiiss Horn.
unarms inram was next sworn.
The evidence given by the witness
was relating to a house occupied by
tho Bridges, and is not impoitant.
F. Leslie, sworn: I knew Bridges,
bought furnituie for him. Saw him
in Lyons & Levey's store. Was
talking with him in the store when
Patten came in and walked up and
down the store. Bridges said to me,
that .man is always following me,
he means trouble.
Cross-examined: Patten did not
sa- anything to Bridges while in the
air. Castle hero offered the
evidence of W. G. Wood in wtiting,
he having left by the aiariposa that
morning. It was as follows: I was
a clerk in Lvean & Co.'s store.
About half-past four on the after
noon of the shooting. Patten came
in and asked me if Bridges often
came to the store. I said, he comes
once in a while. Patten replied,
Well, if he comes in, let me know.
Half an hour afterwards I heard
pistol shots, and saw Patten fall.
L. J. Levey, sworn : I am a mem
ber of the firm of Lyons & Levey. I
know Bridges, have had transactions
with him. I knew Patten. J saw
Patten come in our store twice while
Bridges was there. I am not sure
pf the time, but it was before the
shooting affair. On one occasion
Bridges as in, and I saw Patten
coming in. Knowing about the
trouble, 1 ucnt-and met Patten, and
talked with him, not wanting any
scene in the store.
air. Horn, recalled : Patten would
not settle with me until I gavo him
a document, which was a will. air.
Castle has it. It was found among
the Bridges' things after the shoot
ing. 1 was in my workshop when
Bridges rushed in after the shooting.
I do not owe Patten one cent.
The will was produced, and air.
Horn stated it was in the hand
writing of L. K. Patten. Ho par
ticularly recognized the capital let
ters. This document was made by
Patten favorable to airs. Bridges.
Btidges, re-called: I saw this will
between the 3rd and 7th of Novem
ber. It got mislaid. It was in my
, wife's possession. I never took
chargo of it.
By the Attorney General There
were only three fchcets when I saw
it. I did not rend it through. I
recognized it as written by Patten.
At fivcVcloclc' the court 100m
was cleared, only the Chief Justico,
counsel and jury remaining. Tho
will and a letter containing 25 pages
were read. Tho latter was from
Patten to airs. Bridges. Tho Court
adjourned at 5:50.
On rc-assembling at 7:1)0 o'clock,
the Court was ciowdcd with specta
torspvho nearly all remained until
tho jury brought in their verdict.
air. Castle stated he had to re
quest a favor. IIo had been search
ing for the unknown person who
conversed with Bridges iu the Y. at.
C. A. Hall and had found him, and
Mould like to have htm testify.
Attorney-General I do not know
of what good it will bo ; however, I
will not object.
S. U. ainnn, sworn, stated: J am
casually acquainted with Bridges,
aict him at the Y. ai. C. A. Hall
several limes. I had a long convcr
sntitin with him about his mnniage.
1 1 old him of the scnndal in regard
to his marrying aiiss Horn, and
also her character before marriage.
Bridges appealed to be ignorant,
though he seemed to have slight
suspicions. The conversation lasted
fully an hour. Ho stated his wife
was faithful to him and a good step
mother to his children, lie told me
she was recommended' as. a wot thy
woman before marriage.
Cross-examined : I had known him
about two months. It was a few
weeks after-bis marriage when I told
him. He did not appear to be much
By the Chief Justice I do not
know where Bridges was living at
the time of the conversation. He
did tell me who recommended airs.
air. Castle then rose to make his
closing argument on behalf of the
defence. After thanking the jury
for their attention and patience he
said, the taking of human life is a
grave matter. Nothing is held more
sacred by law than human life. It
is an easy thing to pass judgment on
an affair of the nature we have
heard. I ask you, gentlemen, to
pass your sentence with deliberation.
The charge is manslaughter in the
first degree. There aic several de
grees. The jury has to determine
the degree, The plea as you have
heaid it is one of self-defence.
Bridges took the stand and reviewed
his life in Honolulu. His quick mar
riage after arriving here was one of
convenience. He is a young man
with a soft heart and perhaps a soft
head. On the stand he showed he
had not much strength of character.
His marriage was a hasty and rash
one. His wife's cortespondence with
Patten after her marriage was what
no honorable woman would be guilty
of. Why did she marry Bridges?
It was eventually to begin to live a
respectable life. From the letter
read I believe Patten had a strong
feeling for airs. Bridges, but he bad
no right to any such feeling, for he
was a married man, and he grossly
violated his maniagc vovis. One
passage in it makes me believe he
never intended to marry Lois Horn.
You mnst have concluded from
Bridges' answers that he is a simple,
unoffensive young man. If he bad
been clear-headed he would not have
called upon you in this case. You
nrc not called upon to judge of an
upright man, but a weak one. The
question is whether Bridges had
sufilcicnt cause to fear Patten, and
put himself on self-defence. His
arming himself with a pistol was for
self-defence. While walking up
the street he was suddenly attacked,
and turning round beheld the man
who had threatened to kill him.
Confused as he was, he fired and be
lieves he fired again. Which shot
killed Pattpn is important. The
evidence is clear beyond reasonable
doubt that the first one did. I trust
you will not give a hunied decision,
and that you will give tliO'prisonor
the benefit of all doubt. I ask that
justice be done though the heavens
Altorno3'.General Neumann next
spoke on behalf of the Crown. After
thanking the jury, ho said that what
ever your verdict will be we will be
satisfied. There 13 only one question
before you, Had Bridges any cause
to fcAf that Patten would kill him as
ho said ho would? It is a dangerous
thing for a man to make threats. It
is safer to attack a bravo man than a
coward. This man who is dead was
guilty of an indiscretion. He was a
married man, a father, and got into
an intiinncy with a young giil. The
whole Horn family knew it. air.
Horn bonowed money when ho knew
of the intimacy. Patten made a will
in favor of this woman. This young
man (turning to Bridges) has get
murder on his conscience. It looks
to mo that the family lived onPnltcn
at tho expense of the prostitution of
this woman, Such an unholy alli
ance was bound to have its conse
quences. It wns criminal in Bridges
to many again its lie did. Ill tt
place like Honolulu) anyone could I
find Out the reputation of aiiss Horn
in three days. If tho gossips cannot
find out any evil against n person
they will invent it. Patten knew ho
was doing wrong to keep up this
intimacy after she was married. All
the threats that were made were
passed round at the social board
from ouo to another, and Bridges
heard it. Government, law, the
public and morality have somo
rights. Perhaps with only one shot
he would not have been amenable to
the law. But ho fiied two shots.
It was the second shot that killed,
beyond ica.sonablo doubt. It it had
been the first shot I would not have
prosecuted, but the fact of firing a
second time showed deliberate in
tent. It will he a dailc and sad day
for this country if people were to
.resort to deeds of violence for their
self-protection. Gentlemen, I have
laid my theory of the case before
you. I thank you for your patience,
and leave this case for serious consi
deration in your hands.
ciiAiusi; or "run 01111:1-' justice.
Chief Justice Judd said: On the
12th of November a gentleman
named Patten came to his death by
a pistol shot. It was near five
o'clock in the afternoon, while the
sun was still shining, at the close of'
ordinary business hours. It has
been proved clcar.ly to you that that
would not have occurred, and Patten
not robbed of his life sent without
a word of warning to his account if
a pistol had not been carried. It is
not tho custom in this community to
carry deadly weapons. So long as
I have a seat on this bench, both
j-oti and I will do all we possibly
can to prevent the carrying of fire
arms. It was something to say very
favorable to this little city, which
most people suppose to be a com
munity of barbarians, that during a
period of sixty or seventy years no
human life has been taken by
violence. The character of your
verdict will do much to decide
whether this state of tilings shall
continue or not. It is admitted that
Bridges fired the pistol that killed
Patten. It may be a matter of sur
prise to you why he was not pre
sented on a charge of murder. (His
Honor here read the law, defining
murder to be the taking of human
life with malice aforethought, with
out authority, justification or exten
uation by law, and .manslaughter
killing without malice aforethought,
illegally, the only difference being
in the matter of malice afore
thought.) The Government must
have shown that Bridges killed
Patten with malice afoiethought be
fore it could convict him of murder.
The burden of proof to the contrary
does not rest upon the defendant,
but the Government must prove
malice beyond a reasonable doubt
to make out a case of murder. By
reasonable doubt is meant one for
which a reason can be given, and
not an imaginary-doubt, or vague
conjecture, or mere possible doubt.
His Honor then defined the degrees
of manslaughter, said it was not for
the jury to weigh consequences or
apportion punishment in this case, as
that responsibility rested with the
Court. He cited examples of what
constituted manslaughter before the
law, such as killing by the careless
discharge of firearms, a workman
letting stones fall from a building,
etc., but those weie not the offence
in the highest degree. It was not
for tho jury to weigh degrees in
their minds, however, only to agree
to the facts in the case and bo guided
by no other rule. The law in re
ference to sclf-defenco was an old
fashioned one, as administered by
judges of this country, and even in
those places where homicides were
frequent he was not aware that the
judges set up the law of thoborders.
Tho law binding us might not seem
chivalrous, but it was the best and
safest, thoMuost conducive to moral
ity, safety andprotection to human
life. Under 'the law, to make,
honiicido excusable the provocative
injury must be actual. A man had
no right to go armed by fear of im
aginary thteats. They must not
rcfuso to convict because they found
that tho assault upon tho defendant
was premeditated, as giich a fact did
not provo selfdefence. A man must
retreat as far as ho safely can from
a patty by whom ho is assaulted;
must fly as far as he can, and may
onlv htlnclc his nasailanl When
hemmed in, as by a wall or ditch.
His duty was to cscape--that was
the law of this country nnd a man
had no light to use violence if he
had a chance to escape. It was
their dutv to consider whether in
this case any
injury would have I
upon tlic ilelcuuant 1
which could not have been redressed
by his friend the Police aingislrntc.
If thero was no extreme danger our
laws would have afforded all neces
sary protection to defendant. What
was tho duty of Bridges under these
circumstances? A man may not
eay, "I believe iny life is in dan
ger," in excuse for homicide. If
that was an extenuation there would
be no occasion for a jury. Would
a reasonable man' believe his life was
in danger, or that' ho was in danger
of feevcre bodily injury? His Honor
did not agree with the Attorney
General that defendant would have
been justified in 'filing one shot.
The law did not justify him in using
nny mote violence than was neces
sary in repelling the assault. It was
not a case of necessity. A man was
not obliged to take life until all
other means were exhausted. I am
asked to charge you on behalf of
defendant that if lie. had been in
bodily fear of his life ho was-justi-fied
in firing. 1 decline to do so.
They were to decide what effect the
threats against defendant had upon
him by his actions subsequently to
being threatened. They need not
trouble themselves about the unfor
tunate relations said to exist be
tween the deceased and Bridges.
Nor were they to weigh in their
minds w'hieh of the two men was
the more valuable to society. They
might also leave out of the question
whether, in killing the deceased, the
defendant was defending the honor
of his family. They had only to
consider the events that occurred at
live minutes after five on the fatal
evening. How was defendant'
sti uck? Did ho have an opportunity
of seeing what weapon was in his
assailant's hands? That it was a
weapon from which any man was in
peril of his life? They must coil-
sitter whether tlcicnaant nail any
means of escape. If Bridges had
any means of escape he should have
availed himself of it. . Because a
man is nervous or timid docs not
justify him in using a weapon. If
that was justification many of us
would be in danger from our ner
vous friends. He could not rule, as
asked by counsel, that if Bridges
had been satisfied that threats were
made on his life, they should acquit
him. aicre threats of bodily harm
will not justify violcnco, nor -when
circilrastanccs'show that the threats
were to be carried out. He would
rule, as requested, that where an act
had been done to show that the
threats were to be carried out there
was justification of violence. He
was asked to rule that if defendant
was in a nervous or exciteable condi
tion when assailed, they could find
him guilty of a lower degree than
that charged. That was not the
law. As to self-defence, he had
already stated that the Crown was
bound to prove'.thatj the act was not
done in self-defence. A reasonable
doubt in favor of the defendant
must bo one for which they could
give a reason, such as they would
act upon in all affairs of life. His
Honor complimented the jury for
their attention, and congratulated
himself that though they were of
different nationalities they were men
who would do simple justice to their
fellow-being. Their duty was not
one of sympathy to the father of a
family but to themselves as members
of the community. He believed
their verdict would be one that
would satisfy their own conscience's
and be according to law.
The jury retired at two minutes
before 10 o'clock. At ten minutes
to 11 o'clock, they came into Court
and asked to have tho evidence of
air. Gibson read, and also asked tho
Chief Justico whether they .could
bring iu a vet diet less than tho
degreo charged.' Thoy again re
tired, and at twelve minutes before
twelve o'clock brought in a verdict
of guilty of manslaughter in the 2nd
degree, three disscntiug. air.
Castle noted exceptions to the ver
dict. The prisoner who looked pale
and weak was removed to the jail,
and tho large audience dispersed.
At one o'clock this afternoon
Badges wns brought
nto Court Id
air. Castle, his counsel, briefly
discussed the procedure in regard
to his exceptions, and then asked
the Court to extend mercy to tho
prisoner. Tho case had shown ex-
tcnuating circumstances. 1.11c lacis
.1 -1 .1 Itn tna unfit nfiifrwl
accrucu suoi;ii hu - y v..v.,
and this ought to no consiuercu. 11
was also the prisoner's first appear
ance on any charge. He would ask
the Court to impose the lowest sen-
five years at lnrd labor,
which ho thought would meet every
requirement of the law.
The Attorney General said, the
Government has done its duty for
the act the prisoner has done, lie
would ask the Court to temper the
punishment to this man as the gra
vity of the crime permits. The
prisoner had had a fair trial. Of
tho- extenuating circumstances he
would ask tho Court to take notice "
He thought the end, of justicc
would bo served if the prisoner was
sentenced to five years' imprison
ment at hard labor.
The Chief Justice addressed the
prisoner substantially as follows:
The jury have convicted you of
manslaughter in the second degree.
In my view the evidence adduced
sustains that verdict. This is not
the lightest degree of manslaughter
by any means, but facts adduced in
evidence tended to reduce the charge
to the second degree. The moral
effect of the word " guilty" is vcty
great, and the ends. of justice are to
a large extent subserved when it is
pronounced. The circumstances of
your position arise almost exclusively
from your having been imprudent
enough to have put on your person a
deadly weapon one peculiarly dead
ly, a self-cocking pistol. It was the
fact that you had a deadly weapon,
that your impulse at that moment
caused you to use, which brought
you into trouble. No reparation can
possibly be made for the effect of '
your act. I had not thought until
the Attorney General had addressed
me of giving you the minimum pen
alty. But as the Attorney General
joins with your counsel in behalf of
clemency 1 shall not set up my opi
nion against theirs. Considering
your circumstances and in view of
your former life I temper justice
with mercy and sentence you to five
years' imprisonment at hard labor.
The prisoner was then taken away
by Jailor Tripp.
rPHE partnership heretofore existing
X between E. 1. MILES and U. B.
MILES is dissolved by mutual content.
ailLES BR' S.
January, 10, 1895. 020 at
Census of 1884.
ALL pre ons yet having their house
hold Census Returns in their pos
session, are requested to (hop them into
tho Pou Office, addressed to the
SfSOlt "SUi.''T OF CENSUS." .
DUE B. F. EHLERS & CO. must
le paid hefoio Fcbiuny 1st, or
thoy will bo placed in the hands of
a collector, and payment enforced.
For the Assignees of B. F. Ehlers
II. AV. SCIIMII.T.'
Honolulu, January 15th, 18S5.
TJA.VING ENLARGED THESE
Central & Commodious Stables
wo nro prepared to furnish llm-clnea
turnouts with genilo hoives, with or
without dilvers, A (hie wagonette In
IfncltN at all IIoiirH.
day and uiglit. Horses taken to board
by day, week, or month, on reasonable
terms, baddlo horses, to let.
IIorNCH JBoug-lit aiul Sold,
A Railage "Wagon delivers to all
parts of tho city. Furniture, moving
a specialty. "
O. XV, MAOFARLANE, ) ,
E. If. MlfES, "M Prop's
020 3m '
HOUSE on Nuiianu Yvcnue, No 18P.
oK .80V,en roornB "ml a W Kent!
25. Apply on tho premises. '