The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1882-03-04
THE PACIFIC
Commercial Advertiser.
MARCH I, 1892.
Intermediary Court.

Before HIS Honor Judge A'tCLLN.
Bodies X Co. vs. T. b. Thomas assumpsit for
S77.I3. Messrs. Castle 4 Hatch for plaintiffs.
Mr.. John Russell for defendant. This was an
appeal from the Police Court Of Honolulu. This
was q question as To the liability of the defendant
TO pay bills incurred by the former owner Of the
brig Nicolaus IN regard TO that vessel before de-
PENDANT bought her. From the evidence, it
appeared that BolleS 4 Co. and other creditors
demanded payment from Thomas Of this and
other debts so incurred. under threat of hbelling
the vessel. This was q; the time the bill of
sale of the vessel was being made out. Plaintiffs
also claimed that defendant had promised TO pay
their account. The defence was, that even if
such a promise had been made it was not bind
ing unless reduced to a written contract if the
party making the promise ~repudiated it. De
PENDANT believed he had good reason for refusing
to pay this debt, and denied having made
more than a conditionsl promise to pay it.
The Judgment Of the Court as was fol-
lows The testimony is that defendant
purchased the vessel with notice of this
claim, and that he assumed the debt expressly,
and that it was taken into account in fixing the
price thereof. Now if this was a matter for
which the vessel was liable to a proceeding in
rem, the defendants assumption of the claim is
not a promise to pay the debt, or liability of
another person for which there must be some
memorandum in writing, signed by the party
charged Herewith. He purchased the vessel
with this liability, and then assumed it person.
ally. Judgment for the plaintiff for amount
claimed, with costs.
All Fook vs. Opealu. At the request of Mr..
Nahaku, council for plaintiff (appellant), this
case was continued on account of the absence of
a material witness. Mr.. Holokahiki appeared
for defendant.
T. B. Murray vs. G. Barenaba assumpsit for
S125. Judgment for plaintiff had been given in
the Lower Court, and was now confirmed.
All Chow vs. Blla and Man Tip. This was an
action of trespass, the plaintiff claiming that
defendants had unlawfully impounded his cattle,
and laying damages at $50. In the Police Court
judgment was given for defendants, and All
Chow appealed. Mr.. W. c. Jones appeared for
appellant, and Mr.. Dole for defendants. After
hearing evidence, which was somewhat lengthy,
and the arguments of counsel, His Honor said
he would give judgement on Wednesday.
Wednesday, March LIST.
All Chow VS. Bila and Man Tip. The Court
rendered Judgment in this case, as follows -
9Th complaint is for u~nlawfully and wrong
fully taking and impounding three head of cattle
OF the pialntI1 5. The proof Is clear that the
cattle were in trespass on the land of defendant
Mau Tip, We're captured and held as trespassers,
that plaintiff had notice thereof and had some
negotiations for obtaining their release; (the ev-
idence is conflicting as TO the terms of this ne
collation. and that within twenty-four hours
thereafter they were put in the pound and that
plaintiff thereupon paid the charge made for the
damages together with the pound fees and re-
covered his cattle. Now, what does he sue for ?
Clearly the impounding was lawful. The plain
tiff introduces much evidence to show that the
actual damage done was very slight and therefore
the charge, SIS damage, was excessive. Section
244 provides for such Il case. The amount
claimed may be paid to a police or district mag
istrate with other costs, whereupon the owner of
the animals may have a delivery from the pound.
The plaintiff not having done this, cannot now
recover what he has thus paid voluntarily on
the ground that the charge was excessive, nor
does an excessive charge make the impounding
wrongful or unlawful Everything necessary to
a lawful impounding is shown beyond a doubt,
and it is now too late to consider whether the
defendant asked and the plaintiff paid too much
for the damage done. Judgment for the defend
ants.