The Hawaiian gazette., 1884-12-10
Aaraiian Q5aEette.
wxpNrspAY. PEcENRER q lssA.
Sav-ssss Csa-k eFtAs Eaxaltaa IsaAzia~--
L. RazeuA OQksAsr Tsruas 1SSG


Ellis Us, wuccx
n..,i {. .. Nsc.as lr.f t.s,,. ! 4 Qpa-ioa e
sls ess'rs ~ alssiilt ?.
THIS selScn WIS brvugaE ~ re eoTer Si,.ea
AMI interest. Is the purchase Pc ice Of siA',
ssa-es Of the capital stock sf the Eonclala lcs
werss Gu. a sorpcrateo established and s4-
isti1g znder the laws Of tins Ki8gie0i, and
Claimed . have been sold sHd delivered By
he plailt;F e the defendant.
The actsuu vas uie.i hefcrs Mr.. JasiFse
Austin and iury a. the iast July Tern, and
4 rsriics vas rendered icr the riailcd IS be
clai1rei and he 3efsndsnt sPreals 10 shis
CcurE
The piainelF's and defendants Witnesses is
agree IS e tie FACTS. { pen s2e plai1tt ; show
ny. he 9efendalS offered p h1T he SKY shares
gs sock a. SO . SHARE, and thsrsurca ave
ressui.u- certificates ct me stock sssrsgseng
SKY shares were endorsed By the PARTIES IN
uhuss 1ames they wers issued, and thersuPon
we're banded By ne plaintiff % the defsnGInt.
saG De sruk tbsui. counted and examined them,
and aid they were az right. and SAID be wvqlf
paw fsr them IN The morning. and then said
lhas be would i<s 70 have them IN cue esrni-
ca.s. The piai1lf then said 7 the Defendant
WISHED be wcHld gee tie sock u enc eerti-
ca1e n iefsniant's uame. The defendant
theraupsn t-ck The certificates cur Ct his pocket
ans handed thsur back te the plaintiff who sscS
them and thereafter surrendered them 81 the
citcs cf the company, and procured csrlh-
cara for SKY shares IN he defendants aafne,
ard he next day It was isnGsrsd 10 the de-
fsnda1t who refused 70 receive gr pay fer n,
zhergurcr tins acton was brought.
The defendants saws he Halis the efisr Ct so
4 share Tor the st,cS, and she plaintiff safi be
wuGld aks L. The defendant shea sahi Il
did not expect wa 70 Accept that oiferg and
sl.inha said as a bargain. Thai when The
7,ainilf had snfprss,i the certificates be c,arie
lp b defendant WITH them IN his band and
cugnted cut sixty shazss. Defendant sahi Il
irn'r want tlem. don : k1oS what u co with
ileEi-T Plaintiff said 7 VII get them changed
for a new certificate. and stsrted for the dc0r-
Defendant said again thaE he did not want t5e
zteck, slG the next day declined u rscstve or
pay for the new certificate f,r sixty shares en-
10 being rendered q hun
The questions n the cass arse % exceptions
10 the Judges charge.
The Judge charge that the sale WIS complete
gpGn the defendants acceptance ef the en-
icrxed shares with the intention 70 lpprupri-
4 y
blg them for the purpose Of having them
repiaced By new csruhcase, IN his own name
vas uos enough u make the sale incumplste.
This was excepted 70 UPON The ground that II
assumed that SUCH Intention was proven or
IGmtrs,i, and eft nothing fer the ilry % ind,
sither upon the direct flcts testified to or gpon
the inference 70 &c drawn from these fIctS-
In considering tins exception or any szceP-
O. a charge, the charge must Be locked az Is
whole. Another pcrnt stated 70 the jury by
the Court was Ia. L the facts we're "a shown
By the defendant. the vsriict must be n his
avur, aud whether that were 50, or the fIcsS
we're as shown By the plaintiff, -w1s left
&c tie iGrErsC that exception IL i whole Il IN
tznahle
The only point ct mcment 70 Be examined Is
she llst clause excepted %, that the rgtaru e
the five certiicatss &c be exchanged fer zoe,
10 dclsndInt's own Nance was ncs enough %
make the sale incomplete
The authorities cited By dsfsuda1t's counsel
arg AMPLE and anqu.sti0uei BY US, that if IN 4
-uHtract fur sale any thing remain &c be done
81 selection, By REINSTATEMENT, By aItsrariou Of
tie thing soii, or By taking possession, the
delivery nay BE heidi iarumplete, and thetsale
1lacrumpii=hs,i. and whether 70 be 50 held Is
usually a question fur the Jury
Section is5 Of the Civil Code snacts that If
certificates Of stock II ] corporation are ISSUED
the stock may BE transferred By the endorse
ment and delivery thereof This provision
substantially lccuriz with the law IN all cam
merclal countries 80 far Is We have heard.
NcT the i've certificates Of stock Aggrsgat-
Iug sky shares, n the hands Of the Gefsn-
( tIut, we're Of the szlct commercial Y1Iue Of
the cne csrchcass fCr sixty shares Afterwards
tEntsrsd to him Having the five n hand, the
defendant b. surrender Of them q: the cfics Of
ne corporation could require one cerrfcats
instead thersqf- aud having the che, cuulf AZ
VII require the i've for L. Either, when IN
hand Includes the power % get the ether.
I The KIND Of paper the certificates are written
/ ca, the nature CT The handwriting, even the
verbs used, &C the date, CO the name Of the
certifying 1ficsr are Is 10 ucnent= L the GER
uicate q legal certificate L Is ezactiy slIui-
Tzl=ut n value 70 another CT others Ct the sane
7 number Ct shares The material Of the csrriE-
cItas constitutes 10 part gf their value
( II then the defendant having the five csrtii-
cafes IN hand said they we're al right and
1zGsd the plaintiff n ger them exchanged for
[ the cne- be made the plliatif his agent fur
Z that purpose, and. f the next day when the
ere certificate vaa tgnfsrsd hin, be had taken
/ It, Il would have included the right AZ any
I tine Of getting ~ surrender, i've certifrarss
/ CT the sane 1z1c1ata and Eurth the sane AZ
those originally given Up Il Is impossible 70
crncsIvs thai the rule cited Of somethiuC left
I e he done which renders the sale iucrmulsrs.
can apply e this case
Il TINS He 50, then the part Of the charge
complained CT vas right n law, and but little
else rzuails CT the dsfsnGazts case
| The 1Efsn1a1t s1cspts 70 the instruction
that IF TIE fIets vsrsas testified 70 BIZ the
WITNESSES FIX the PIaiHtif, the pla;atiT va.
entitled L Tgrriict Il his favor !" AMI 70 tie
instruction that Il was fer the Court and net
l far the Jury to say -has facts coustitats Al
acceptance
These e1-sPGn1s mist be treated as spplisi
% the facts of the case at bar. The cEarzs
vas not written, and We have 10 shorthand
reporter II the lrsral words Of charge are
ahstrzcriy eonE1iersir many = sound direction
M zlt BE construed aasouud This would not
&c flIr Z the Court CT the IIligzntz-
The gIesticu II the case vas whether there
vas delivery and acceptance of the stock
1 In Hatch ". B1yisT L Cush =, %, Shaw
C. J. saFs that delivery Ii ! qaestiuu Ct law
On G1diEpGrsf facts In Perkins " HinsiaTz
and another 81 M1ss- 1870, the Court say
| III n crEtrzrs t. sell, the conversation vas
chiefly Grail net absolutely distinct n its term.
CT consistent n rs dI1zrEus parts. AID IL eject
I partly dEpends-ol inference Z Re drawn frun
H. the question g.es u the Jury.
In Merchants National Bank " Bangs IGz
HASA zSl-5-s the Court say, n ! case Ehers
tue question Eas as 20 the sale and delivery
Ct carloads CT crrn, Practically the dTfiraltT
3 % ASCERTAIN, when Tie evidence IL nearTs
CT e4IIVocals what the real ntsufi1u af the
parties vas AZ the tine. L Il properly qzes-
TIT af Art fer the iITyr under proper insfruc-
t5Gus, and mEat Be submitted % them, unless
Z i Plziu a. natter of Nv thai the eFidsuce
vii Justify finding taE che way"
In LazE e al y. Old C0louT e Fail River
r. r Co, Il Gray If3, II az zcsicn Ct rEpisTiu
wters dsfsnda1s claimed = special lien &c
balance Ct frEizhr EzPai5, the faets were IN
disputed and the Court held a. aatrsr Of law
that the hen vas z-od.
In Harry - Potter 10 Gray, so, the Cur.
charged thai If certain E1-tz wsrs trrs. they
Void cGuattzts delivery, and Il Wa heId
right
In Weed "a T1saeus OBJ. zs4, qaotes
fr1z Il Benjazia cn sales Sec. ssI the SUI,
Taa flr delivery Of h1Fs. part Il a larger
quantity n wzrEho1ss of cue Fraid- Tie
plaintiff vas informed, affe- the sale. that the
h1ps we're AZ FriiS's nrd went there, and had
them weighed and tick away pazt, AID befsrs
be Esat far baizncs, they EerE seizsd b. a
cTsdI-or 4 tie vsnEG-, kEld that tie dsIfTgry
b 6siensiazz vas al be va h1sud 70 MAKE.
In this case Z = T1rrh ren1rrizz that Lord