The Hawaiian gazette., 1876-03-22
HANAIIANGAZETTE
Az ISDEPENpENr JoUGNAl,
DEVOTED TO HAWAIIAN PROGRESS,
Supreme Court 81 Ihe Hawaiian
IslandS.--In Banco.
ENl4 KaLELE0NILANT IS. HoOPIo,
20 3 AZ.

D AEEAa s--lsE NN-fhs AsA AAt4 t-Af 70
tcrusj = verdict Tor The defendants, 10 which he
Z plsiBns alleged ihs following excvptlo5s,
~ he trial % the above entitled esuSe The
plai1ti5 showed dssd OF e0nveyaues 10 hesSeu
z froe, u1e Hikoui. dated Jsae -, A D. ISL, o.
he hcd IL QeeStoo. and slso showed that SAID
niSoni hal oesa 10 sols and adverse possession
Ct SSsd lard a. It's owner Tor twenty years prior
thereto. tsklns rs rents and pvUtts aud ,hst tie
defendants Wsre "a p0sSeSSiCn Of said and since
April A. d. 1873. claiming under = lease, aud
whiie 10 sch possession thai they had pas.ured
. cattle on said lsn5. aud sold OF timber for fuel
I for uhieh t5sy received $50 0ne Of the plain
ais Witnesses teSii6sd ,hst he bad boaght said
timber Ut the defendants and paid thea said $3.50
Z therefor phieh sea OF moaey Slth $50 more ad-
6sd thsrs.o, be sent IL NAY, 1874. 10 the plaintiff
10 gsy their rsUt, 10 tie foUn Of Al order Tor 500
o1 Il H4cSCsld i CO. also that he got receipt
tbzs sad Or3eF VAS PAID fbe p6InUa also
sloaei Tie rslce q tie meSne profits u said
Ind 2c1 notice % Gals aud rested.
The Defendants Claiael audsg ! lease iron
saii HJSori dated April 9. A. d. 1873, FOR 4
tsrrn q fifteen years. sad letter IRON The plSiu-
lif dltad April Is. i. d. 1873. addressed TO Que
Iiiikslzai nos deceased, ard Pot on evidence that
sid Lliikslsni attended to whatever Business the
plaintiff ordered bin 10 agtesi to on the Island
Of kazzi froa the time that sue Esnt 10 Kauai
j. slaAE AAAlE Al aAN - -4-At ~ etl-s -
scne tine ID the year lS5h There vas no eyi-
de1ee THAI said letter vas ever shown 70 Or know
u ~ the dsssnds8ts-
~lhe phi1tia excepted to the admission Of
said lease 1ad Letter and als0 10 the refusal OF the
Cocr. 20 iustrce. the Jury that all the evidence
reiied 90 by tee deieuh1ts could a. tue most
risrsly afTsc. The plaintiff right % recover dana
yes. q znoGn. % = license to eater upOd said
and OF 10 lease for uss over one pear from date
Of sad letters and could act pssseat the Pl4iutH
recovering Judgment Tor SAID l1ut.
The pl1intiF also excepted to the verdict req
isrel i0r the defendants Is not sustained by ha
or eUisaCe.
AL Of ah,eh exceptions were duly taken aud
,eIgwed
At the bsdu1g Of the exceptions the testimony
sent Up rs supplemented 81 the statement Of
HiS01j iaat she had received rect for the land
si1ce her deed to the plainlif but that she had
received 10 rent from il for tTo years.
Il E1s made to appear At the triAl, that the
plIintLf received deed Of coayeyancs Of the llud
u I2azi. % h411i. the subject Of this sals Irou
Hik1ai saica deed j. dated Jaas u, 1871, aud
Is duly acknowledged and recorded, on the sane
Gay.
0a the 9Th OF April 1878. Hfkouf executed
lease 10 aTyc u ths defendants for the sane land,
for fifteen years At the rsalal Of 500 ysIr, and
they Immediately Went into occupation OF the
l1ud
A letter o. The Plaintiffs TO the late G. W, Ii
Gk11Ei, : Ofsrei IN testimony. datei l6tA April,
1873 zai c1a-aiuiEy the f9lI5ziuy passage - l
see what y01 say about the eOupetI0a 0t the
lease OF Ltz4i 10 the BEtiyeS All that the papers
are 6uishsi Tor 500 year for Is years What
20 y01 t5iGS Of tbs ease Ii you think II Is
good thing, thea | Will approve Of II. What does
hakir1 think ofjt7 Has be heard Of Ihis lease
% others But. l nay see yOQ By the hi.agel,
and VII tax wjgh you then"
The defendants paid 10 Hiko1i one years rent, I
and the text year. having cut down some ct the
defe1t1nt's timber gr0Ei1g on the LAID and sold
II for $50 ss1s Al an0uat Of 500 to the plain-
IF * rent tJr that ye1r, /. G. from Mag, 1874 10
Nay. ls15.
1t dos not appear whether the plaiatif iii o,
I'D u1s ku0E Ehsaes the m0asy vas derived .
BAT. il does appear that she bAd learned by the .
mouth Of NJvember Of that year, that they we're /
cutting d3Eu timber, and vas much dissatisfied /
there-t ard served them with notice 10 quit, Of I
which ths f5i0aiag is a copy.
aHoyoLrLu. NOV. .. 1874 I
" Aloha to yo1 hmm h2.ele1a1LAui com {
plains q your haTilg cut g0Od OF the land OF Ii
al. This and vas cu1Tsyed By Hik0ui, JGae .
- 1871 zrd Hikoni has since, had no right 4
there. and tJr5id y0g 0ccCpyI1s under the lease .
from Hikoai Of Nay ls,, 1873, a. that VS. iaSa- .
Id
According to tie plea Of the native coa-seI for
the defendants. Nr. M4i9ho, ihsy rendered the
rent f0c ls15-6r ia April. 1875, and il was re-
fused, and "a acsioo Of ejectmeat Eas c0nmsaced
sept ., IsI5.
Apparently. the dsEsnd1uts offered the lease to
pruTe what they considered 70 Be their title, and
The letter 10 Prove that the plaintiff, by her
acts, had made the acts Of Hik5ui, Der own acts.
The letter and the deed might not be efsctgal
i0S Int purpose, bat surely. they ara admissible
svideuce- Nor can Il be said that the judge 81
III erred IL declining to instruct the jury ALSO.
gtsly. Is to the weight they shoali give to the
whole body Of the testimony. tie bad probably
iEsli o. eaeh i1iiyI5sal testimony aud lis tel
i=1cY. ~ much a., il bis jglgusat, it vas proper
- Do, and he left the consideration Of the weight
Of the evidence 10 the jury,
The Elzi exception ( the geDeTal one that the
TeFiict Il rot sustained b. LA and the evidence
We voult adhere 70 the practice Of this Court
l0t 70 Gistgrb a verdict. simply because Is seems
% . against the icsiytt Of evidence, bat IT, on
ewes Of the En0le case, It shzil appear, that in
rider 10 have arrived at the verdict the jury INST
ave misunderstood the tsaoT Of the eFidsacs, or
and uisaPP!Isd the directions OF
be judge o. that tie verdict Is 20 strOsgly against
be ssIght Of sEi5s1es q 70 Indicate Bus or pref
.dice, It : Cur duty 10 set It aside
10 this case, It Is certain that HIkOui made tie
Iced TO tie phintif. and i does rot appear By
he deed tbat there vas aay reservation Of rent
20 the Use Of the grantOr; nor ( such rsservs-
I0a made to appear BY any act o. statement Of
he plaintiff, Thea HIkOui had 10 riEat to lease ;
he l41d after having made tie deed - plaintiff
Bat il Is said thar LiHZslzni Eas accustomed 10
rsHszct any basiasss f1s the plailtiE which she
iirsetsd hin to DO. aad that be dreE Up the Lease
-ro1 this u i sought that re may infer that be
id i for The plaintiff.
Il seems 70 be sgScie1t answer to ihis, that
ie did not sign the lease far the plutiff neither
guieg bsE nzzl,s nor k;s 0sn, bat IS fzs as the
.sidsace goes, messly acted Is anaaas1zis f1r
dikoai- Is Is not shown 10 ssidelce, nor i It ;
PparsEt 81 he deed, that the plaintiff gave L |
ikaiaui aag sath0ri.y TO act 10 the premises for
.er- nor dI9 be cl1iEl 70 act 10 her zane, or II
.er bshzif
Tie next question t. did The plzi1liE ever rzti-
The Lease by scs CT deed OF ratksr i there any
sstuouy thai she cid 50 rztify the Gesd OF lease
I'd adops il fsr her OE17
The evidence CO Ehich the defs1dants rely 10 I
stzhlish this proposition is-FFss, tie letter q
Re plaintiff 70 IIIikzlzui, dated April 10, 1913. Z
shZa Z qE0ted ab0Ts- The passage which j I
1stsd, Occsrs 70 > letter couTeJI1z intelligence q
Interest zbo1t the SEItsr, and the mataal &C. c
Gailtzncs Of The tE1 corrsspoodeaLs il vas a
% INTENDED f0- the osfe1iEats 10 aay zzy, AID '
1ast csTt-ialg eoatzins 10 words rz;iJilg adopt
e G. apprpTing the lease; % the c5atFaEy she :
TprsssiT asks the cpinioz q her correspondent Z
I'd juice Mcbride o. the subject AID z.-s r