The Hawaiian gazette., 1877-02-07
WEDNESDAY,. FEBRUARr :, ls77,
Supreme Court of the Hawaiian hs-
Inuds-Ianuary Term, lSSs.
AIlrS. On. y. HArErs Avn JrDD, J. J.


his is statutory action 10 enforce coatrse, for
service. brought up by appeal from the district
court OF Waiuka 10 the circuit court OF the seco0d
iaiicial circuit, the jury waived, and the case
transferred by oOoseat, TO the SapVe0s COars in
BAnco.
Ii appears frUm the papers and admissions hlei
that this contract was made the lsth Of January
1916. by which the Defendant agrees % work for
the term uf thirtv-f,ur months for the a. Owners Of
the Waihse Plantation = then being MesSrS. Charles
c Harris and Hermann A. wiiemsnn thar On
the 10Th dSy 81 August A. D. 1876, Mr. Harris SID
his interest 10 Mr. Wiiensnu, Who then became the
owner az The entire plantation This was iiSsolu-
ton Of the partnership ParsOEs oOatrseS, page
$50.
where the servant IS hound BY any company 81
individuals, the death Of any one partner or the
change Of partners in each eODpany, shall net
uperAie 10 release such servant f,om the terms Of
his CONTRACT
ms we take 70 mean that whatever changes may
take place in the original rn employing the A5orer,
the eoatrae; continues TO be binding loue as one
q the original members remains in the firm, to
whom the iabOrer can look for the pzymea; % bis
wages Tor directions his labor, Snd fer humane
treatment, al Of which were the CONSIDERATIONS,
which induced hin to enter into the contract,
The tern = The OEnsrS Of the waibee PiAata-
tion = il this contract Is uore than the nue, by
which this co-PSrfnsrship vas known that Is, it Is
the hrrn-nAme under which this enterprise co..
Quoted Il cannot be elSimed that the Defendant BY
the form Of his agreement, eostraeied 10 work for
VhomSoever might become the owners Of the MAihee
Plantation. Tor then there would be nc individuals
,scer;ained To whom the service WAS owing. in
czSe Of change Of ownership, these individuals
would b aseertained independently Of the servants
win.
On the 10Th OF September 1876. Mr.. Wiienann
sod the Waihee Sugar Plantation 10 James Makee
and lohn D. Spreckles but reserved certain share
IN the pr,ceeds q tbe plantation IS stated in an
indentnre eoleDpOraDecusly executed. BY tins
indenture toe purchasers q the plantation agrve
that Mr.. Wiiemaun shall receive during the term of
tWo years three fourthS q 81 the grOSs proceeds 81
the erOpS on the Waibee Plantation, consideration
q a reanelion made by am il the agreed price Of
the pl4utAou and 10 the further Consideration that
Mr.. Wi6euaun employ Snd retain the lSborerS then
employed OF the plantation under labor contracts,
and Mr.. Wiiemaun at the same time gave Mr..
Mskee Power Of Attorney to manage the labor in
his name
StOry defines s eo-partnership to be "a voluntary
contract between two or mOre competent persons to
plaes their money. ELECTS labor Sni skill.
ali q them, IN lawful commerce or business, with
the understanding that there shall be communion
q profits between then"
Lindlsy co-psrtnerShip, section u, says; " An
agreement share profts sud losses nSy be said TO
be the type Of partnership contract = and again,
" Although j, has already been pointed cut that to
share profits IS prims fseie agreenent for CO
partnership. yet il Is conserved rightly that part
nerSaip. Is not the result q agreement to share
gus Tsiurns-" ! Lindley on Partnership IL.
Tested by this definition Mr.. WiiemAnn is not Q
partner for be does not share in either The profits
the Ses of tie plantation, but in its gross proceeds
Ibis iudenure contains a condition that the
percentage 10 be paid Mr.. WidemAnn shall cease
upon auy sale Of The plantation his would mill
tate against the idea that the payment Of the per-
ceaiAcs vas upon any valid consideration except the
one last stated the employment Of the lAborers
by Mr.. Wiiemann under their contracts, and BY /
Itself, would be nothing more than the agreement
between WidenSun on the one part sud Make and /
SpTeekles the other part, by which Wiiemsnn in
consideration Of this percentage was to retain aud
employ the contracted aboEers On the plantation Of
MAkes and Spreekles-
NoE The Plaintiff eAn only have the right to |
enforce the personal services Of the Defendant BY
virtue Of the Master snd Servant Act, subject to 1
provisions Of which this contract was made.
When Mr. Harris left the partnership Mr. Wide 4
mann being the remaining partner bad the right to
compel the service az the respondent BY the 1874 1
section q the Civil Code which controls the whole
matter And il be hiss taken Messrs Make and /
Spreckles into partnership then the partnership thus
formed would have S righ, to compel the service
that the oueSt;ou rises whether this Is change in
the partnership, which Is provided for by the law or
s mere auemp, to assign the contract, which in
itself Is un2ss;gnable
Nov It Is clear that Niienann had conveyed the
absolute interest 10 the Es;Ate, aai bad nothing
more to convey he would have to pay no share Of
It's Losses, and be would enjoy no share q its
profits. The clear sveruent is that be would have
three quarters q che per cent Of its gross proceeds
not Of its net proceeds part payment Of the price
fer which he sold. thus sTerring sale Of the whole
Estate he has 10 voice in the management Of the
Estate CT even in It's sale, If Meszrs Make and
Spreeke< shall see ct to sell it he Is in no respect
Of this plantation IN which title this action
Is brought Messrs SPreokles sud Make are the
sole owners Of thAt plantation and they are not the
owners with which this nan contracted.
Judgment f0T Defendant
ELISHA h ALIEN
Gas. C. HAREIs
A FRAScIs JVDD.
hon A s HARTvELI, for Plaintiffs,
{. PEEToS, for Dsfenda1t,
IL