Polynesian. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu], Hawaii) 1844-1864, 1852-12-04

gard to the letter from the complainants t
the defendant, but even by the tenor Of tha
letter, they were free to demand the goods
IN the event of their considering the good
unsafe in your (the defendant's) hands.
They chose to act, and it was then the dut,
OF the defendant to have delivered over th,
goods on their demand. He refused; pro-
ceeded to sell the goods without accounting
to Porter & Ogden; and having placed him:
self in the wrong-he must abide by the con.
sequences. 1t appears by the deposition o.
the defendant, the only satisfactory evi-
dence in the case in references to the sale ol
the goods, that the goods were sold by him
at high prices, and that he has remitted to
the complainants the proceeds ofthose goods
in full, according to the custom of the trade
1t moreover appears, that the compainants
have acknowledged the receipt of those re-
mittances, with the exception Of the remit
tance of Sl5OO-through Jardine, Matheson,
& Co., of Hong Kong, and that since then,
ne has received advices of another consign-
ment from the complainants. 1t is said, then,
that he has fully accounted to the complain
ants for the proceeds of their goods, and is
not bound to account over again to their at
torneys. To this it is replied that he had no
right to account, after the demand made Of
the goods, except through the attorneys OF
the complainants, Porter & Ogden, and that
he should be made to pay them the amount
of the goods sold, and be left to get the re-
mittances back from A Orr, Ewing s. Co,
as best he may. That the defendant did
wrong, there can be no question, but may
he not pass by the attorneys and account to
q he L.. kl,,a Il. 4
though in so doing he takes upon himself
the risk of all losses by the way. If after
Janion refused to deliver the goods they had
been burned or otherwise destroyed, he would
have been the loser; and If his remittance of
$500 should never reach the complainanls,
or prove bad, he will be liable to make il
good again. But the complainants have re-
ceved and acknowledged The receipt Of all
remitiances except the Sl50O-and the only
question remaining, IS, shall the defendant
be made TO account here to Porter s. Ogden
for this sum for which he can show TO re-
ceipt? In the eye of the law we do not see
how the defendant can escape the liability to
account to the attorneys here; but convinced
as we are by the presumptve evidence af-
forded by the late consignment of the COM
pia nants TO the defendant, that this remit
tance has been received by the principals in
Glasgow, we cannot in Equity and good
conscience decree that it should be paid to
their attorneys in Honolulu. Still, as there
is an uncertainty in the matter, and for the
security of all parties, we do hereby order
and decree, that the defendant pay in to the
Clerk of this Court the sum Of $500, as a
deposit, to abide the event of the receipt or
non-receipt of the remittance of the amount
by the compliments in Glasgow. And it is
further ordered and decreed that the defend
ant pay all the costs of this suit from the
10th of March 1852, and the complainant all
costs anterior to that date.
Honolulu, December 4, 1852. 1t-3O