The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1882-04-22
Supreme Court.
JASUAKY TEEsr, 1852.
Before His Honor the CHEZ JUSTICE.
Monday. April 3.

The Court was opened on
Monday, April 3.
Their HonOrs Judges McCully and Austin were
also present. Before the commencement Of pro
ceedings. Mr.. Preston addressed the Court. and
said that a committee had been appointed by the
members Of the Bar - procure a portrait Of the
late Chief Justice Harris. The committee had
been able to secure the services Of Mr.. Furueaux.
who had known His Honor during his lifetime,
and he had painted the portrait which was then
hanging in the Courtroom. Nr. Preston now,
on behalf Of the Bar, desired TO deliver the pOr-
trait into the keeping Of the Court. 70 accompany
the portraits Of Nr. HarrIs's predecessors in
office.
His Honor the Chief Justice then said
Brethren Of the Bar: It Il very gratifying to
the Court 10 have placed in this Hall such aS
faithful portrait Of the late Chief Justice Harris.
The rush Of human affairs Is such that the
memory Of those who have been conspicuous III
the history Of a country, passes too quickly away.
New men are constantly coming 70 the front who
have had no acquaintance with those who have
passed away. This likeness, as it keeps the
stricken face Of our departed friend ever before
rs will ever remind Us Of his genial ways and
his strong personality.
1--WE could wish that there might be per-
Petuated in this Hall the faces Of those who
have done much for Hawaii in bringing 1t to its
present position Of q government of law based
upon the intelligent consent Of the subject, and
not Of force.
You are to be congratulated that the artist,
whose work this picture is. had the advantage OF
frequent converse with Judge Harris.
The Court thanks the Bar for its promptness
IN securing this portrait.
This shows the value in which you hold
his Judicial services and the warm place which
he has and will ever have IN your hearts.
A Hawaiian jury having been empanelIed, the
first case taken was
Rex vs. NinauaIii, Kahanui, and Kaukeha
assault and battery. Mr.. W. o.. Smith conducted
the case for the Crown Mr.. J. Russell was for
the defense. Tn latter made a long and earnest
address To- the jury, lasting forty minutes. A
unanimous verdict of not guilty was returned.
The Minister of Finance VS. ". Knudsen and
Ann VI. II. Knudsen, his wife. Mr.. Preston, on
behalf of the Crown, moved under section 5O7 of
the Civil Code, that Judgment be entered up
against the defendants, and their property the
Ahupuaa Of KOlOaj and that a sale of the land be
ordered to satisfy such Judgment. The claim Of
the Government was for taxes. Mr.. Hartwell,
for defendants, moved that the motion be dis
missed, on the ground that section sos of the
Civil Code, which provides that the collector
shall call on each taxpayer ut his residence, or
usual place Of business, or otherwise give notice
to the taxpayers to meet him at convenient
points or settlements Of the district, IN the
months of September, October, and November,
to demand payment of the taxes assessed afore-
said, had not been complied with. The Court
promised to hear arguments of counsel on the
matter ut an early date.
Rex w d.. Mahoe. Defendant had appealed
from a decision Of Judge BickertOn's, on the
ground that he had pleaded 81 not guilty, whilst
the judgment had been given on the assumption
AlAA AE A-aAAEa kAAAN AAN va 49,
the prisoners mother and Manoa in support OF
the appeal, but Mr.. Bickerton's statement-that
the man pleaded guilty in the Police Court-Was
confirmed by the evidence Of Mr.. Russell, and
the Court confirmed the sentence already gwen.
Tuesday, 18th.
Kalehua k ~ Kamaka W and Kailianu, her
husband ejectmeEt. Judgment for the plaintiff
by default.
Rex W. Henry John ; larceny Of harness. Nr.
W o.. Smith, for the Crown Dir. RUSSELL Tor
the defense.
The Jury brought in a verdict Of not guilty, from
which three jurors dissented.
KaupOuo Gf al. W Koa k ejectment. Default
had been made but, on the motion OF Mr.
Ralaukane. counsel for defendant, the Court.
after hearing argument, decided to vacate the
default. Mr.. kaulukOu appeared for the plain
tHfs- The case for plaintiffs was partly heard,
and adjourned TO
Wednesday. 5th.
At the conclusion Of plaintiff = case. Mr.. Cecil
Brown. who appeared with Mr.. Kalaukane for
the defence. moved n nOnsuit, on the ground IN
the land which the petition called ~ acres while
IL was shown that defendant only occupied ten,
and that the land could not be appOrtiOned under
a writ Of possession. Tn Court decided the
point against MT. Brown, who noted an exeeP-
ton to the ruling. The defendants case was
then proceeded with. Before His Honor summed
up. sir. Brown fled instructions, which he asked
the Court to give to the jury. These His Honor
declined, and his decision was again excepted TO
by Mr.. Brown. The verdict was for the plaintiff,
with $1,000 damages. three jurors dissenting
Mr.. Kalaukane excepted to the verdict, as against
law and evidence.
Kawili W vs. KahaleOle e all ejectment.
Mr. = b Dole. for plaintiff; Mr.. j. l.. Kaulu-
kou- for defendant. The claim was for three
fourtbs Of the land described in Royal Patent,
2IOG. After the case had been heard, Mr. kau-
Iukou fled exceptions to the grounds upon which
the Chief Justice proposed to charge the jury.
It was 8 pm. before the jury retired and after
nearly an hours discussion they returned a YER
dict for the plaintiff with damages Sl3O Zone
Juror disentsng) To which Mr.. hauiuAou hO'eu
the usual exceptions.
Thursday, 9th.
Iuka k vs. ct al W Noa ct al ejectment. Mr..
Davidson appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr.. w.
l.. Holokahih for defendants A verdict for the
plaintiffs was brought in, damages assessed at
Minister Of Finance vs. V. Knudsen and Ann
MICH. Knudsen his wife. This case was now
argued. The Court took time to consider before
Bniies vs. Thomas. The appeal in this case
Kanoku ct al vs. Kaupe; e~jectment. The case
was formally discontinued, the plaintiff having
died before the writ could be served
HoIelua ct al vs. Keone KaPu; ejectment. This
case was continued to the July term.
Saturday, sth.
usr Majesty the Queen ConsOrt vs. Keawe-
amohi; ejeetment- Mr. Davidson as c9unsei
g. tbs defendant asked the Court to say whether
r. Majesty was entitled to bring an action at
law in her own name. Mr. Preston Her MaJestys
rounsel cited Blackstone as To the British law
ON this subject. He had in bringing this suit
followed English presidents Mr. Davidson In
reniv argued that no reason existed here for the
airI,io1 Of rules belonging TO the days of
EcndaIism and urged that the statute law Of
tbs Kingdom under which a married woman
cannot bring an action except IN conjunction
0itb her husband should Be declared to extend
- The present case. The Court decided that
n Majesty the King must be joined IN the
octi,u. yr. Preston asked time To consider the
course he should take
Eonvra y. Kaaimauu. Mr.. Davidson asked
fyr A reinforcement ON account of the absence
- n material witness. Mr. Hartwell objected
unless costs 10 date were paid the case put over