The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1890-08-30
The Skinner & Co. Claim.

The Skinner g. Co. Claim.
Mr.. EDITOR: Your leading article
of this morning about the Skinner
Il Co. petition induces me to ask
you for space in reply. The petit
TONERS, as agents for, and net con-
tractors with, the Hawaiian Gov
vernment, carried immigrants to
these islands. They were to be
paid certain commissions and the
fare of the immigrants for this SER
vice. Their instructions were " that
it was desirable that the male i'm
migrants should not be over thirty
years of age, and that there should
not be over two infant children to
each family [ contend for the
agents that some discretion in the
recruiting of labor was EEK neces-
state rel left to them or they
could not have induced the immi-
grants to come. Such discretion
they claim to have exercised.
Mr.. Thurston, for reasons which
he deemed sufficient, declined to
pay their full demand, but offered
to pay of the $4,000 or thereabout,
the sum of about $4,000, which
offer was declined. The claim was
to have been amicably adjusted, but
before Mr.. Thurston, Mr.. Hatch
(attorney for the GOVERNMENT and
I could meet, the Cabinet resigned.
I could not present the claim to
Mr.. Spencer, who knew nothing of
the facts, and therefore have, on
behalf of the agents, asked the
Legislature to investigate the mat
ter, course of action which is
neither unusual nor improper.
The refusal of Mr. Thurston had
been based upon the fact that some
of the families had more than two
infants. We on our side insisted
that we had followed our instruc-
tions if an average of only two
children had been brought hither.
These immigrants were ordered
by the planters through the
Board OF immigration, and were
accepted by the planters and ship
ped to the various plantations to
the following number, viz: III
men, IS women, 10 infants, max
ing instead of an average of two
children an average of l 29-1OO to
each family. That this was within
the intendment of our instructions
letters from the Board of Immigra.
ton will show conclusively.
will not say that Mr.. Thurston
construed the restrictions to the
agents more strictly than his pre-
decessors from any other except
| conscientious motives, but that
construction was unreasonable, un
fair and unjust. We have asked
only for the repayment of the fares
of those immigrants who were sent
to the various plantations anC
accepted by the planters. This
matter was tried in the Court by
Mr.. Hartwell the jury having
failed to agree. Since Mr.. Hartwell'G
departure | was entrusted with i
and have discontinued the actor
and laid the matter before the Leg
islature for investigation and dis
posal not only because l have {
right to do so, but because it i:
proper that that body should inves
tigate this claim and direct tn,
Minister of the Interior what actor
to take without our being forced tt
resort to litigation. If this were
not matter between the agents
and Minister of the Government
perhaps your statement that the
Legislature is no place for such
claims might have more force anC
with all due respect l fail to SEE
the logic of the argument in the
legislative hall against action or
this petition. The hon. member
then says the difference between
this claim and Mr.. Bowler's is tina
the latter had been thrown out o.
the Courts and this has not. Mus
claim be thrown out of Court tt
become meritorious enough for leg
islative action
Though non residents ant
strangers we have the right t.
expect that the Legislature, wh'
may and can do so, will be jus
enough to us to investigate ouI
CLAIM and will, if 1t be baseless
reject it; if it have merit act upol
it and recommend to the Ministe
of the Interior how to dispose o
it, without forcing US to litigation
Yours respectfully,
PAUL NEUMANN.
Honolulu, August 9th.