The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1880-03-13
Supreme Court. in Equity-January Term,
1880.
HARRIS, c.. j.; McCULLY, j.
r KFFIJEoGANr rs ID. MANAKU.
Opinion "a IA ullv, J.

an exclusive life estate in the land of Moanalua
subject 70 a charge or rent styled Auhau ku
ka wa and to a right Of the plaintiff to reside
on the land whenever she may wish. His claiml
are founded on the instrument of which we here
give the original Hawaiian and the translation
which we adopt as giving the literal and true
meaning in the English language:
(THe Documenf.)
T. Ike auanei ma mea a pau ma kela, owau, c
Luka Keelikolani ka hooilina hookahi / koe o ma
waiwai a pau o Kamehameha ' i make, mamuli
o ko'u pOno, a i kulike al no hoi, me Ike ano o ka
noho ana a ko maua kahu i aloha nui ia, ola o
kaleiluhiOle, j make, ma ka alma o MOanalua.
MOkupuni o Oahu, ma ka haawi ana aku a ko'u
kaikunane Kamehameha V j make, a i hoomau
ia aku no hoi e a'u i ko maua kahu Ia Kaleilu-
hIole mahope tho o ka make ana aku 0 ko'u
kaikunane o Kamehameha V ~nolaila, / kulike
al me ke ano o ia noho ana o ko'u kaikunane
Kamehameha V me kona kahu ne Kaleiluhiole,
ke hcokohu a Ike hoomau aku nei au ia ponO a
kuleana a pau maluna o ko'u kabu, Ike keIki a
KaleiluhiOle, ola hoi, o David Manaku, a mau
loa, mai keia la Is o Dekemaba, 1874, i ia alma
Ia o MOanalua, mai ka uka a Ike kai aka hoi,
ina e make e aku kuu kahu o David Manaku
mamua gu, alaila, e hoi mai no ka alma o Mo-
analua me a'u, a me ko'u mau hooilina.
A ma keIa no hoi, e like me ma pono i hookoe
Ia mai e ko'u kaikunane Kamehameha V, ma ua
alma Ia, ola hoi, ma auhau ku ka wa a'u e make
make al a me kou noho ana maluna o ia alma la
pela no hoi au i hookoe mel Ia'u a me ko'u mau
hooilina c like me ia i hahaiia ae la.
No ka oiaiO o keia Ike kakau nei au i ko'u inoa
ma keia la l o Feberuari, makahiki 1875.
r. KEELIKoLANI.
(TranSLdtion.)
Know all men henceforward by these presents
that |, Ruth Keelikolani, the only heir of all the
property of Kamehameha V deceased, in conse-
quence of my right and in accordance with the
manner in which our beloved Kahu (care-taker)
Kaleiluhiole, deceased, lived upon the land of
Moanalua, Island of Oahu, through the appoint
ment of my brother Kamehameha V, deceased,
which appointment | continued to our Kahu Ka-
leiluhiole after the decease of my brother Kane
hameha V therefore, in accordance with Gust
like) the manner Of living of my brother Kane
hameha V with his Kahu, Kaleiluhiole, l myself
now appoint and continue all the said rights and
privileges to my Kahu superintendent or care
taker), the child or nephew Of Kaleiluhiole,
David Manaku, perpetually, from and after the
18th day of December, 1874, upon that land of
from the mountain to the sea but
indeed, if my Kahu (superintendent) shall die
before l do, then the land of Moanalua shall re-
turn to me and my heirs and further, in accord
ance with the rights reserved over that land by
my brother Kamehameha V, that is to say, what
soever L shall from time to time require, and my
right of occupying that land at all times when
ever L please, which L reserve to myself and my
heirs as above set forth.
" AbO bAdba VI LLlc Il HahC nCICunIb = III
name this LIST day of February, A. d. 1875.
(Signed) r. KEELIKoLANI.
1t will be remarked at once that the instru-
nent is essentially native Hawaiian in its charac-
although having a resemblance in phraseol-
ogy and form to a common deed or lease. 1t
would be difficult, and perhaps not possible, to
give a reasonable Interpretation and one which
would reconcile every part to the whole without
taking the point of view from the mind of the
native Hawaiian. And ] deem it right to do this
on the principle of construction that contracts
are to be interpreted according to the intention of
the parties, as they have expressed them, and
because the recitations of the instrument require
to consider the peculiar Hawaiian relation
subsisting between the grantor and grantee in
this instrument and between the predecessors of
both of them. Furthermore, counsel on both |
parts have assumed that this must be the mode
Of Interpretation. and have offered testimony and
made argument upon the nature Of the Hawaiian
relation of the parties. We do not by this sup
port the idea that a contract made between
or to which a Hawaiian is one party,
is free from the application of the settled prin-
ciples of Interpretation as known In Courts.
The first and controlling inference to be drawn
from the instrument is that the plaintiff placed
the defendant on her land of Moanalua in the
same attitude and Office as that held by one Ka-
towards the late Kamehameha V, and
subsequently towards his heir, until 1874, when
kaleiluhiole died.
Inc recital Is that the beloved kahu OF the
brother of the plaintiff had lived on the
by the plaintiff after her brothers death till his
OWN decease, and therefore the plaintiff was
moved to appoint and continue the defendant,
who was the nephew of Kaleiluhiole, in the same
status as to the land and towards herself. The
testimony as to what were the rights of kaleilu-
Mole at and in Moanalua is not quite harmonious,
put it is such that we arrive without hesitation
1t some conclusions OF fact.
We first observe that Kaleiluhiole had been
by Kilinahe in the charge of the land.
All the testimony is that he had the same hold
ng as Kilinahe, who was %summarily discharged
by the owner because he was not pleased with
MS management. Yet there Is nothing to sup
port the idea that a life tenure had been abrO-
gated. There is nothing to show that he was
different from any other head-man, luna or kOno-
liki in charge of a chiefs land.
As to Kaleiluhiole, the testimony of Loloua
WI, Henry Makanahoa, Henry Kahanu, Ohule,
Nalimu, Malao and Heu is to the effect that so
ar as the land was cultivated, the crop was the
property of the owner, the landlord, who dis
posed Of it by contract with the prison and the
barracks. The testimony of the Marshal is that
n buying poi for the prison he dealt with Ka-
nehameha and not with Kaleiluhiole.
a part of the land was leased to DIR. Ford for
rice, but there is no intimation that
Kaleiluhiole leased it as the life tenant. A salt
pond, supposed to be very valuable, was worked
Oy ana Tor account solely OF hamenameha. lie
employed Kaleiluhiole somewhat in this labor,
but it is not set up that he required to get a con-
session from him, or that he made him any con-
'ideration whatever for the privilege Of taking
the salt. This does not look as if Re. .jluhio.
mad a life estate in Moanalua.
The defendant offers testimony to a ~ -
HaleIluhiole was placed in possession { H. q,
n consideration of the affection and fec. y OF
,Onsanguinity entertained towards him by A
nehameha in consequence of his mother havi- -
been q nurse and foster-mother. Let this be so.
Il does not follow that the measure OF Kameha-
gratitude was a life estate in this land.
Il may well have been a moving inducement for
making Kaleiluhiole. rather than some other
nan, the head man of Moanalua. The place was
me of reward and consequence to a Hawaiian.
As the head man, he enjoyed the control of ten
who must work at his direction in labors of
which be enjoyed a part of the result. While
he yield of the land was only what may be called
produce, such as poi, pigs, poultry and