The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1888-07-31
IMPORTANT DECISION.
Kamehameha Lands Decided to Belong
to the Estate-Question Turns on the
Rights of a NIinor-The Kings Sow
ereign Rights in Land Denied.

Judge Dole on Tuesday filed mis- deci,
sion in the cause OF L. A. Thurston, Min
lister of the Interior, VS.. G. R. Bishop ct
al, and it is in favor of the defendants
The cause was on the calendar for the
last April term, and jury was waived
and it was tried in vacation by consent
of the parties. Mr.. A. S. Hartwell rep
resented the Government, and Messrs.
F. NJ. Hatch and Paul Neumann the
Trustees OF the Kamehameha Estate.
1t was suit in eiectment Tor the LII OF
0pu, brought upon the ground THAT 1t
has never been and is not now awarded,
patented, granted or leased under or by
virtue of any land award, royal patent
or government grant or lease, and that,
by the law applicable in such cases, the
Hawaiian Government is the absolute
and unlimited owner thereof" or, in
other words, that the Government, by
virtue of its sovereignty, is the owner OF
all lands which are not held by some
title proceeding from itself"
Two lines Of defense were taken,
namely:
First: That Kamehameha III. was
the sole owner ofall the lands oil the
Kingdom by virtue of the sovereignty
which ne received from his predecessors,
subject, however, to certain underlined
rights of chiefs and people, and that,
having satisfied such rights by the con-
cessions which were carried out through
the Land Commission and the Mahele,
the ownership of other lands not dis
posed of remained in him, and has des-
cended to his heirs; and the land in dis
pute being one of such unassigned lands
now legally vests in the defendants /;
and,
Secondly: That the chief Hoapili
was formerly in possession OF this land,
and Was the recognized owner thereof
according to the ancient system OF land
tenure; that, when he died in 1910, he
gave it or lett it by oral bequest to Lot
OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES Kamehameha v.
then about ten years old, and that 1t
was held for and by Lot kamehameha
without interruption until his death In
1872, and thereupon vested in his heirs. ]"
His Honor opens his commentary on
the testimony by saying there is little
doubt about the facts. The two lines OF
defense are inconsistent. Plaintiff hav-
ing admitted the facts in the second line,
there is no need to consider the other
line of defense, based upon the sovereign
title of the King, as by the Declaration
of Rights, announced in the year 1889,
protection was assured to all persons
with their lands and other property,
with the guarantee that nothing what
ever shall be taken from any Individual
except by express provision of the laws.
This Act Invested the King OF his sover-
eign right OF control OF the Iii Of Opu and
gave Hoapili and his representatives an
interest in it, under the provisions OF the
law creating Board OF Commission to
Quiet Land Titles" generally known as
the Land Commission" enacted De-
cember 10, 1916. The Commission was
authorized to recognize private interests
in lands by virtue OF royal grant or gilt
made orally anterior 10 1889 1t would
inquire simply into the history OF the
derivation. No claim was presented to
the Commission on behalf OF Kameha-
meha. He was born in 1880 and was
not twenty years old at the termination
# the time for presenting GLAZING, on the
14ih OF February, 1913.
Persons WIN were absent from the
Kingdom or who were unrepresented
therein were the only ones exempted
from the requirement Of having to have
their property rights, above mentioned,
confirmed by the Land Commission.
There was no exception made in favor
of minors, and Kamehameha was a
minor. His Honor, however, goes to
the standard authorities, where he shows
that no minor can be preiudiced or de-
prived OF rights by the neglect OF his
guardians. Kamehameha's parent and
guardian" during his minority had
failed TO apply to the Land Commission
for confirmation of the title in question,
yet, according to the authorities cited in
favor OF minors, Judge Dole concludes
his learned opinion IN the words fol
lowing:
"Under these principles, therefore,
and the evidence submitted, do not
find right of possession to this land in
the plaintiff, and order judgment to be
II