The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1875-03-31


obtained for it, being only about one-third
not that the bill alleges inadequacy O.
consideration, but as tending to throw
light on the question whether these people
could have intended to give full authority
to Lawrence to sell their interest in thi,
property without limit as to price for any
sum which suited his views, and without
any reservation to themselves of the right
of ratifying the sale.
1t is in testimony that Kaopua is quite
hard of hearing that Nahua was elderly
one of the old-fashioned retiring Hawaii.
ans, and Kalama seems to be possessed Of
more zeal than intelligence.
Was it likely that they would have
given this unconditional power of sale
TO Lawrence, a comparative stranger to
them, if they had fully comprehended its
import7
1t is alleged in the bill that they did not
understand it as meaning what it express
ses on its face. The answer alleges that
they did so understand it. The testimony
of the subscribing witness, Ragsdale, was
taken; the other subscribing witness, J.
d. Halai, having died since the bill was
filed. Ragsdale swears positively, 81 read
the paper to them so as to impart the same
impression to them that / received from
the paper myself" and shat they undoubt-
edly understood thoroughly that the docu-
ment gave Lawrence the power to lease
sell or compromise the land, because that
was the gist of the whole matter"
Such testimony by subscribing wit.
ness is very strong and requires strong
proof to gainsay it. Ragsdale's memory
is somewhat shaken, in my opinion, by
the three letters written by him. Jan.
18th, 1874, he writes to VIM. Austin Ma
hula that the paper he witnessed and
translated was deed and the money men
TONED was $780, Sept. pod, he writes to
Mr.. Hartwell that the paper was a power
of attorney, and that the parties were in
duced to sign the same because Lawrence
said that he could make it profitable for
them, and that he could get at least $1,000
or $500 for the lands. Oct. LIST, he writes
to Mr.. Stanley, that his memory had been
very much assisted by Mr.. Stanley's letter,
&c, and that he is positive that the par
ties "knew they were giving Lawrence
full power to sell, compromise, lease or
otherwise, all their rights and titles to
the property mentioned in the power of
attorney" He adds that something was
said by Lawrence before the parties sign
ed the document, of the petition to the
King and the Court business. He saws
also that William Austin was one of the
parties to the power of attorney, which is
not the case.
In his testimony before the Master he
says, that after witnessing the power of
attorney Lawrence suggested that l
should add on this certificate" "When
they signed the paper put on the certif-
cate" The witness did not have the orig
inal before him when he gave the testimo-
NY or he would have seen that the certif-
cate referred to of his having correctly
interpreted the document was written by
Halai and evidently contemporaneously
with the entire instrument.
The loss of Halai's testimony is to be
1 regard Ragsdale's testimony
as amounting to this: that he was called
over to Lawrence's office just before court
time and interpreted the document in the
usual manner, the impression being left
on his mind that the parties understood
the same.
The power of attorney, though drafted
by Halai, Hawaiian, is in the English
language, circumstance of slight impor-
lance perhaps, but it is enough to rebut
the presumption that they understood it
and creates the necessity ofshowing know
ledge the part of the plaintiffs of its con-
tents.
The impression left on the mind of a
Hawaiian bystander is valuable as show.
ing the impression likely to be left on the
plaintiffs minds.
S. w. Mahelona testifies that he stood
at the door of the Office and Ragsdale
said "this paper is to authorize Lawrence
to act for you, to attend to yourlands for
you, and to talk with the Ali about the
and and if the Ali should wish to lease
Dr. buy the land that he would come and
consult with them. saw them sign their !
names. Lawrence talked some in Hawaii |
an himself, and he said this paper is for
ne to attend to your land, for me to talk
with the Chief, and if he wishes to lease
or buy l will come and let you know.
Alel bhS pdpSl was Sly ueu Iulu bleIl III |
Lawrence can get six or seven thousand |
dollars for your land you had better SELL"
Mahelona understood that the power of
gave Lawrence the power to ne
yotiate, but that the party reserved the
light to ratify any bargain and were to
DC consulted as to the price; and, if these
we're really the representations made, the
contract does not express the true inten-
ion of the parties.
H. L. Sheldon testifes that in 1867, he
occupied desk in Lawrence's office, and
interpreted between him and
hese claimants about the lands in ques-
ion, and after Lawrence had said to him
hat he was in treaty with the King,
through Governor Dominis, for sale, he
old Kalama of this, and she replied that
hey wanted to get the land back, and
would not sell it.
If this conversation took place after the
igning of the power of attorney, it shows
What Kalama then understood Lawrence's
powers to be; and it is not likely that
lawrence would have commenced negoti-
tions to sell until after he received the
,ower. After Sheldon learned that Law
ence had sold the lands, he told Kaopua
nd Kalama of it, and that the money,
1900, was in the bank for them, and they
declared thew wou1d never |