Daily Honolulu press. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1886, 1886-01-22


evening, in this paper (Press pro-
duced); believe l am the party
in article; am certainly the
party who wrote the account inserted
therein that was sent to the BULLE-
TIN. Q.-Will you examine the
in that article and state
what is true or false? A.-The
statement made by me in the BULLE-
TIN is true, also the statement made
in the Advertiser" that Oakley
had no claim against the Govern.
ment. 1t is not true that it was my
duty to pay any claim of Mr..
Oakley, nor did l ever have any
moneys in my hands to pay it. 1t
is true that l struck out some items
of the bill--not presented by Mr..
Oakley, for l had nothing whatever
to do with him in the matter-nor
did / attempt to force any discount
on Mr.. Oakley. l never demanded
from Mr.. Oakley $500 or any money
for getting the money paid TO him,
or for getting his claim paid to him,
or for anything else. / do not know
what Mr.. Oakley might have said,
but / had no claim to settle with
him, either honestly, justly, unjustly,
or otherwise. The statement of Mr..
Oakley's version of the affair being
capable of being proven is utterly
untrue; there is not word of truth
in it. The claim of Oakley was for
work done under contract for Ger
tain houses in Alakea street. / do
not know of any written contract !;
all know is what ! have heard. l
heard that Oakley built some build
ings there for the Queen. Iremem-
Der that Curtius Wallace came to
me and showed me note that Mr..
Oakley had made for $500, and
stated to me that Mr.. Oakley had
some money coming to him for
building those houses, and that if
Oakley could get that money his
note would be paid. He (Wallace)
asked me to see the Queen, as he
was in need of money, and try to
get that for him. | told him
should, or see him in few days
afterward. l then told him he
could have the money because there
was that and more money due Mr..
Oakley, but that l could not advise
Her Majesty to pay the $500 or use
Mr.. Oakley's note as an offset, but
if he would have Mr.. Oakley sign
an order that l would advise her to
accept the order as a receipt, and
give it to him. Mr.. Wallace asked
me to write the order; / wrote it
out and handed it to him, and he
left. He brought it back subse-
quently, signed by Mr.. Oakley; l
directed him to endorse it Git was
payable to his order), and sent for
Mrs. Swan, who was attending to
the Queens business. l am not
sure whether Mrs. Swan paid it to
him or handed the money to me, but
at any rate it was paid to him and
the order given by Mrs. Swan to me
with orders to keep it for her until
the whole affair was settled. (Order
dated April 81, 1885, produced in
book and identified by witness.
Some time afterward Mr.. j. S.
Walker went to the office and asked
me whether / held Mr.. Oakley IS
affair in my hands for settlement on
behalf of the Queen. told him |
did not, and related to him what ]
have stated here just now, and that
was all that had to do with it. Mr..
Walker asked me whether | would
have Mr.. Oakley's account settled
he spoke to me about Mr.. Oakley S
necessities. | told him l would &c
over to see the Queen. The Queen
told me she would pay the money at
once, but was not sure whether the
bill was correct or not, and asked
me to look over it. l learned thai
His Majesty had given Oakley note
for $1700, which represented work
done up to date when note wa:
given. ! thought Oakley could use
it until his business was settled witt
the Queen, but there was no money
due to Mr.. Oakley until the worl
was completed.
Mr.. DOLE objected that witness
was speaking of what he had only
heard. The Court ruled that, il
testifying to his own actions, it wa
competent for witness to give evi
dence of what he had heard whicl
directed his actions.
WITNESS Mrs. Swan gave me TIN
note and said she placed the not
with Mr., Mcintyre, and in case n,
settlement was made either return
the note to her or to Mr.. Mcintyre
l told Mr.. Walker to bring me
statement of Mr.. Oakley's claim
which he did. l went over the bill
and found that $500 had been pal,
to Mr.. Oakley and must be deducte,
from the bill. (This was said t
Walker.) In looking over the bill
l told Mr.. Walker there were som
items in it which under no con
sideration | should advise He
Majesty to pay. My impression i
that these items amounted to $14S
1920, or $178-I cannot recollect
In answer to counsel witness sal
his impression was that it was $l78)
There was some correction made b.
than aunnnsa hU Mr. WaIla