The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1888-09-22

| In the Supreme Court of the Hawaiian
Islands In Equity. Before Preston,-J.
A. H. Loo Ngawk and Tong Cbong Soy,
| Executors of the will of T. Aki, deceased,
VS.. Alexander ]. Cartwright, Samuel NJ.
| Damon and Curtis P. Iaukea.
| DECISION.
The bill states that on the 9Th of Novem-
| Der, 1887, His Majesty being indebted to
| the com plainants in the sum of twenty-One
| thousand dollars for moneys heretofore
had and received to the use of said Aki did
| by and with the advice and consent of his
entire Cabinet agree with complainants
that in consideration that com claimants
would bring no proceedings and cause no
petitions or bills to be introduced into the
Hawaiian Legislature in the premises, all
the estate of His Majesty with certain eX-
ceptiOns, and all the Crown Land revenues
should be assigned to Samuel NJ. Damon
Curtis P. Iaukea and Joseph o. Carter in
trust for payment of said moneys to COM
plainants and that the Commissioners of
Crown Lands being so requested ana auth
Orized by His Majesty agreed thereto in
respect of the assignment of the Crown
Land Revenues. That in order to avoid
all unnecessary publicity concerning said
indebtedness to compliments, and also as
matter of justice to such other persons as
then had claims against the estate of His
Majesty, it was also agreed between COM
plainants and His Majesty and His Ma
jesty's entire Cabinet and the Crown Lands
Commissioners that the proceeds of such
trust property should also be applied pro
rata to payment OF such other claims as
aforesaid. That the sole cause and pur-
pose of creating such trust was clearly and
mutually agreed by and between all
the parties therein concerned as aforesaid
to be that the said Indebtedness to com
plaiuants should be paid pro rata out Of
the proceeds of the property so to be as
m as 1f GlIH md fEaf
thereby all publicity and all proceedings
concerning said Indebtedness should be
avoided That deed of trust was on the
21St day OF November executed and ueliv-
cred by His Majesty and by the Grown
Lands Commissioners to said Samuel NJ.
Damon, Joseph o. Garter IN G. P. Iaukea
as trustees for the uses, trusts and pur-
poses above mentioned and said trustees
accepted said trust and took possession of
the trust premises thereby assigned to
them and were then acting as such trustees
with the exception of said Carter who
had since resigned as such trustee and
that said defendant Cartwright had been
substituted and that said defendants were
then the actual trustees under said deed
or trust. That said original trustees and
also said new trustee accepted said trust
and took possession of the premises there
by conveyed with full knowledge of all
and singular the matters before stated and
set forth and consented and agreed at and
trust deed to the payment OF compliments
said claim as one OF the then existing debts
OF His Majesty out OF such trust moneys
as should thereafter come to their hands
and be available for that purpose. That
within three months after said DIST day of
November compliments presented to the
defendants in writing their said claim for
said sum of ST. 900, with interest thereon
and requested the defendants to approve
the same in writing and to apply such
moneys in their hands as should then or
thereafter be available in their hands for
payment of His Majestys debts to the
payment of compliments said claim pro
rata with the payment of such other debts
of HIS Majesty as should be payable out of
SAID moneys. But that the defendants
absolutely refused to approve said claim or
comply with said request, or to pay the
same or any part thereof and wholly re-
the cOmplainants submit that such refusal |
OF the defendants is a breach of the trust |
created by said deed and is fraud upon !
the compliments and they submit that |
the defendants ought to be compelled TO |
approve said claim and to pay the same |
pro rata with other debts of His Majesty !
the payment whereof is in said deed of |
trust directed.
The complainants by their bill as |
amended pray for decree that the de- |
PENDANTS do approve said claim and pay |
the same pro rata with other debts of His |
Majesty the payment whereof is in said |
deed of trust directed and as alternative |
relief that their claim of $71 900 be estab-
lished by the Court, and that the defend |
ants be directed to pay the same pro rata,
etc.
The defendants, by their. answer as
amended admit the execution of the deed |
of trust but deny that said deed was in
tended for or was upon the uses and trusts
named in the bill and aver the truth to be
that said deed was given solely for the
benefit of those creditors of the grantor
whose claims upon examination should |
appear to the trustees to be Just and whose !
claims should be presented to them within
three months of the date of the deed or
allowed by Court of competent iuriSdic-
ton. They admit the resignation of }. O.
Carter and the appointment Of the defend
ant Cartwright and that they have ac-
cepted said trust and the entry into pos
session of the assigned premises and the
presentation and refusal of the complain
ants claim. The defendants aver that by
the terms of said deed the allowance or
rejection of all claims against the grantor
was cOnfded to the defendants, that thew |
have exercised the discretion granted to |
them and have rejected said claim because
it was not shown to their satisfaction to be
Just and correct and that said claim has |
not been allowed by any Court of cOmpe- |
tent jurisdiction. The defendants also
aver that no Just debt is due from their
grantOr to the cOmplainantS and that the
sum of money claimed by the complain
ants to have been paid to their grantor if
any was so paid was not paid to the use of
the said Ak. And that the said money was |
intended to be offered and was offered by
the said Aki as a bribe TO gain the inf1u-
ence of the King in obtaining of the Ha-
waiian Government the license for the
sale of opium and that for said reason
are not entitled to any relief
IN Court of Equity.
In all other respects the defendants DENY
The ALLEGATIONS in the bill
The cause was heard by me on the 18th
and 18th inst, and it was strongly insis ed
by counsel for the defendants that the
Court could not and should not entertain
he bill on the ground of the supposed IL
egal nature of the original transaction be-
ween Aki and His Majesty.
Many authorities were cited by the de-
ition that money paid by one party. in