The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1885-06-23

they undertake TO establish the fact thai
their account in the Chronicle Of what q
written report at the meeting cont ained.
was tEue-then we say the best and only
evidence Is he report itself, unless they
prove that the report has been lost or de-
atroyed. Their question asks directly for
the contents OF written document, ana
there Is no rule more firmly esta bltshed
than that = written document is the best
evidences Of its own contents.
The CouFt-Lst him answer the CUES.
ton.
the ruling Of the Court.
Mr.. Taylor-We wish to state our objec
ton 30 that the record may be fright. We
object to this question on the ground that
It calls for the contents Of q written instru-
ment and the written Instr lment IL not
shown to the witness. nor r. IL produced,
nor IL its loss or absence accounted for, and
il IL secondary evidence, without having
shown the things that should have been
shown a. foundation.
The objection was oVerruled and an 81.
cspticn taken.
THE STOCKHOLDERS REPORT.
Mr.. Campbell then repeated his cues
ton Didn't the report that was read at
that meeting of the stockholders state that
the company had run S29O.0C0 behind dur
ing the past year and that IL wa5 then
81. O9O coo in dsbtF
any sums. 1t is impossible for me to keep
that in my head"
The witness did not remember that the
report OF the stockholders said: ITO meet
the demands OF the creditors the Presi-
dent Sir Claus Spreckelg. on his individual
note. has borrowed Sl.0OJ.000 of the Ne
VAd8 Bank. OF the increased indebted
ness 100000 has been incurred on account
OF the improvements. and tAe b lance
represents the losB.ef the sugar crop" He
did not think that any report ever spoke of
him es Sir Claus. Did not remember that
he asked the Directors to itquidate the in
dObtednsSs TO him as he wished TO go to
TITLE TO THE LANDS.
Te the question, Was not the title to the
lands cultivated on the Islands by the com
but the Court overruled the OBJ, cotton.
Mr.. Taylor objected and took an excep-
ton on these grounds; First, that it is
asking the witness for conclusion OF law
and for . legal opinion; second. that this
article nowhere states that the title was
out OF the company, and hence he cannot
be cross examiD ed upon the truth or falsity
of such = statsment because il IS not in
Shere; and. third that all that is stated
about the ownership OF the plantation IS
stated in the article as conversation be
tween the witness posing as an importu
nate creditor and certain stockholders pur-
porting to be present at that meeting.
The witness replied There is the Wyluka
and the Wykapoo Companies, and l don't
know which one you mean. The one is q
lease and the other Is in fee simple. The
lease is from the Crown 1t was for thirty
years, at $1,000 year, and not $1,000
month. Part was in fee simple. The por-
ton that they call the Wykapoo commons
was bought in fee simple on account OF the
contract. The title has been in the conpa-
~ from the start. held the leases and
the whole thing for the company, both the
decd and the lease being made directly to
me. We have the whole thing by agree
msnt, and you can show it in Court il you
want to see the whole transaction. In the
Hawaiian Commercial and Sugar COmpa-
nv there Is a declaration of trust made to
that effect. This was drawn long before
the meeting Of the stockholders from the
6Vst start.
Mr. MoAllister-A foreign corporation
cannot hold land there.
Witness-They could not hold real estate
then. but . law has been passed in the
Hawaiian islands that q corporation could
hold land. had the law passed myself.
The witness further testified There 10 no
slavery on the islands. People have been
import. there by the Government. When
they arrive they are landed the sa me as at
Castle Garden. They are kept until dis
tributed among the planters. who pay Gov
eminent the expenses. They oaO walk
out 1t any time
Noun rSoess OF the Court.