The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1861-04-18
THE PACIFIC
Commercial Advertiser.
THURSDAY. APRIL Is.

LHthNDdJ ~ mn ANs
The POEynesiaa of Saturday the 9th instant,
publishes the decision of the Supreme Court in
the ease of Davis rs. William L. Green. This
suit, as will be seen by reference to the decision,
has. like all bad powder, hung fire in court for
Il long time, much 10 the disgust of all inter
ested and now rhat the decision is known, we
apprehend they will feel more Disguised than
ever. We DO not propose to review it infinitely
those adversely Interested will readily see its de-
fects. and the disimterested will not care, per
haps, to examine it ut all.
Taking the testimony and data as given by
the court, their conclusions appear to be logical
enough. but if there happen L. be other relevant
facts and data not given in their text, what
then? Let us see. The first neat cattle were
landed on Hawaii by Vancouver in 1891, and
given jointly Gin trustD 90 Kamehameha |. and
his companion John Young. - saith the court,
50 say we there is not Il doubt of it. William
Hughes t~estifies that about the year 1896. he was
employed 10y Governor Adams to kill bullock for
their hides and tallow. for the use of King and
Government. "no constitutional government hay
inc been established at that time - note that.
:. Hughes and his party killed forty thousand -
forty thousand more would have been eighty
thousand. One need not be particular about
numbers after that statement. In the year 1871
the taboo on killing bullock was renewed. From
whence that taboo? The court does not say.
Historically, in 1871, the . constitutional gov
ernment,'' like the spcck of a far-off comet,
began TO make its appearance. In 1912 it was
enough, and with horns, too, about $50
as the vaqUeros say. Since then ITS
tracks are plain enough, as we shall see.
IN-..l-. Ill. -. &. ,..r,,-r+5.r,1 ,r,v,rr,,mpr""
issued that taboo, and it was all right, if the
King ordered it; but by what right did the Gov
eminent claim one half of the wild bullock at
that time? Had the King given them to Gov
eminent? The court say yes, or assume as
much. We deny it, and defy the proof. Up
to the wear 1913, the King owned the allodium
of all the lands in the kingdom; that year we see
him parcelling out the lands-som he reserves
for the crown, some ne gives to his chiefs, and
come ne gives TO the - constitutional govern
ment.' for which it, though its representatives,
thanks in an humble manner % for this
most gracious boom. &c. Up to that date. Gov
certainly could not have owned any
bullock. for it had not one foot of land To
pasture them on. We do not say that Govern
nent did not clam any land, on the contrary it
claimed all the mountain and woodland. all the
Wild cattle, sandal wood, big trees and little
birds with yellow feathers under their wings
orsooth we viii not say what it did not claim,
est we be mistaken. -~Audacity is Il money-mak-
NJ virtue.
On the 9TH of April, 1850, John Young Kane
son Of old 3 companion Young, petitions
he King for his and his f%amily's share of the
bullock, and gets "a portion" on the 18th
+ the same month, as per " resolution passed in
Government. it seems. takes q quiet
and in that game and no one appears 70 dispute
Is right. but before or on the 10th of June fol-
owing. there seems To have been a quarrel in the
lmily of the King and Government. and far the
time we see them on that day square off
ubliclv. lIeenan and Savers fashion. u have an
understanding about these same wild bullock.
he -. constitutional government" had grown to
quite a democratic Heenan by this time. and I
lys 10 poor King Sayers E that the arrangement {
ithc-'o existing between" You and me in regard {
4, these wild cattle must now be- legalized by :
,rmal resolution" &c. Poor Say,rs Is in a I
launakrl fog. AMI don't ~recollcct very clearly O.
bout a e e previous arrangement. and consents. e
DO We rccpllect about previous arrange Y
tents. and We would like u have the court pro- 7
nee any that are valid. We fancy the court c
fall back on to the old owls stun a
argument, what right have the court e
90 behind the resolution of King and Council v
T flcts"-all satisfactory enough to the owlets L
II not to other birds. b
W. have Travelled side and side with the courr II