The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1885-09-30

This Is an sppoal by the plaintiff from
a decision III the Nice Chancellor dismiss
in- thc plaintiffs hill claiming sgeoitlic
~ .-nsl,,,c 81 an Scrsc,ncnt toy thc sale
"a land IN the district of MSisluS, island
M, arr,emcni Is Sllecd 10 have
l,.,.,- g-,trr.,l INTO In the month ~ Novcni-
Inv 1871 hut from the evidence II Men.
.},rra n apu,srs 10 hgve been INSIDE IN
Jauuary Ot thdt NeSl. 49,,
Tho Nico Chancellor dismissed the oill
"a tle .rauri. principSlly. 81 lSehcs On
the Tsr, 81 the plaintiff IN pr'Soou'inS ms
clsiw
st the besrnE beiorc Us, an Sthdsylt
ly Mr. ". Il. Castle was filed explaining
and cantradicilnc his testimony given on
tho original hegrluC, on which OCCASION
be- louio5 having rocalved any money
from tle vlsiutif On account ~ the pur-
chase money Tor the land in question.
and sSi5 thst be had no recollection II
SYLVIA coming 10 his othce about the land
By tie affidavit, the witness states thai
fr7sg an ex1miuatron II his bookS he nndS
;hst The ylaintiif ou the third ~ February
~. usia u tho dCponert SSo 70 pSy
.t-Sh down en- the purchase II sssld land
sn5 thar d1po1out then sCussd 70 SdvSnce
tise .rl,uairdor uacesszry - complete the
purchase p-1co and that 81 time sub
<a1Uout l. saii thir5 dSy ~ February
lSSS and p-lor u the commencement q the
sait IN tho yoSr 1872 or 1888 sSid sylvia
cl,ra L. the Office 81 ieponeat and iepon-
ert then rSluc>,ed HIM 10 execute deed
Il sai6 ArlrewS ~ the pDs-niSes IN cues
ton ard offered 70 pSy LiIu the purchase
v-.ca thereof. Eud thSt said SYLVIA replied
thai he would doso but thSt he was coming
Is town IN few weeks with his wife and
thea they would st;Sai 10 Il
The GaTeriau; denies these statements.
But taking the statements u h correct.
do they make tho case any better for the
Plaintiff Was suythInE subsequently
done ty the plaintiff before the defendant
.is5c the improvements 10 the land. show
i-c 81 intention Us the plaintiff 70 ex-
crosse his riEh; of purchsse'
On hooking 81; the agreement: We ind Il
stated tle. land IN question CONTAINS
ninety five acre> r1o-e or less without fur
the- description eIc5p: ihSt Il i situated
81 havaihspai in 6istr1c; Of Waialus, and
the v-sca i've dollars per acre,
Tins G-uas-e-i VS. acknowledged by
Nec5e-ca before Nj Castle On the 18th
Gay q June ISS2 and It appearS % the
Ccurt tbs: these words were then sdie1
land known - the Rics land sold by Rice
10 GCltk" UUie-ro6th : written seem
i--,y g. O r2a-lo-lrGurn q instructions
y 1,-ks there are TWO pieces
In 8 conveyance f7o@ Quick 70 Men
GcZca which : vUt IN evidence there i 6
- ~ fH~-s 4
Gc-os SID u Esve been pSie1;ei 70 " II.
Elca by Gra-: sSS SlSo e smother piece
cc-islC,UE - ACRES pS-t q land described
II Gra-t So e Nah1a- pa-t q the land
rs oc7eSr LaylCC been sold % ether Per
sons
Nov Il does 10: sppe1- that any steps
we've taken 10 ascertain the boundaries Or
1c-aG-g % cEe ls-i ny 10 sCrsa or aScer-
ss1- the a-1CgC- q the purchase money.
TIE --s-.s- was SLOWED 80 remain and
the statement q M Castle 70 SylYs could
only -l-c--. % tins Andrews hsS in
>--Cc.e& me- % p-spa-e . deed for him.
VIII yCC sign ]. when reac;y1~ srd no
tang further waS done, II fac; Il would
sVpeE 90 Eavs been t1-go;cs2 altogether
,,y the plaintiff then at-C-1ey-
Ipc- o c1-S-ie-at.o2 a. the whole case
we l-e q the opinion that tie decision Of
the Nic2 Ch2-ca-lo- vas correct and SC
c--l---v
Tie decision ap2ealed tro@ i affirmed
Tlil costs
A decree VII he signed On presentation
L. A IEurS.cC for vla.1tifTs ). :. Hart
Tel t1- defendant. sylvia
EC-o-C-C. September - ISSS