The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1891-02-14

III bhN A'Nl NlIN NObib VI WV AA'A
waiian Islands. In banco.
In the matter of the application of
I. May and others for writ of man
damus against Alfred Willis, Bishop
Of Honolulu.
s,..-
y, ~ "otier y" Of cnnrs@ aftrr = d@cil
sion directing it to be issued.
If the issue of such Il writ is delayed,
when 1t Is issued It relates back 10
inG itu r va VI i' is '''e '''''S'on WI
In case Of such delay and a performance
of the substance of the command of
the writ before it is issued. such
performance Wou.u oe Il s'lllcleht
Cor vinlatinr If the WIN ''' >o'' -
OPINION OF THE COURT BY DOLE, J.
T. tho -or,,ou n.onuooo 80 .bo
oha n,,teS 49,
eHoa ~ thil Co~"t - +ka ooth 49,,
49, ~ VN'0 Gov'' o ~! vn1 IN o'y
,,,...,,ltan,. r;t - anJar, ~ ha
oi o", 10y ~ u 10 ~
9uIU W ."0 ~ 9t'oANNns, o''il :" ''n ~.
'S ~" W I"'' 4" - eo''',9 " '''0
=, i"ooo :: - Wv anS ~ t,, ~ -
t oo W. H. ~, a w. S
Slf' So"5,"Ii wv a. " h ' - 10y
VI N,"o' '"S W., pr','''"S ;"
l,a~atia, - ,,nae@at - oIaaa aro,.
pOi' v'o", ''U P'o'I'y - o'o?o PioA
''s''vS W Wv e''" e'' D''N1r, - w.. ~
" 49,. ' y, '0' 'A' i''NE0 0'''
SO '', WI c,.,
~ 49, i"o''o" 80 l,,N'
W '''o l'Ss','o"Ti 'i''o Po'o'"l'S
w ''l''i't'''''''' t''o -, 49, Co'.'.
ei, '''i ~ 0P', ~. wy
INV nv VIM '"0,lTn "''
""'i' ,>,.I p,'i w 'n WY. i hn-o, ,s
10y. 10y ~ 10, o ~ 9u I.' Nv" 1 ~
. rG aO l,,,,a.,iaa i Iva haa" d'I,.
''i."'' I II ''.Lp0' V'"9 ~ "''.' ~ WY
81 ' -" y" ,n '0lloI" 3' P
S'np'o'y VIZ VI '''l'''''1''o we" 'i
~ W ~" l'n 7''''' '''~' 81 wv y" WIZ
r. ol w. ac., 1o - 1 .o
49, e., ~: I.:. .I W.
r,ls 0">'an. IVY - l'9 lIo'' IS W WV
22d for fine issue of the writ and
thot fine writ he ouaehad pnon sinh
stantia,Iv the folInwino cronnds.
Thot he was not allowed sutiic;ont
time to nrenare 10 meet fine motion
tina, tho writ hp issued that the af1i-
davit ,unnortino such motion was
misleading and deficient. that after
tho daniui0n of tho Conrt mazda Octo-
hor 2sth 1900 direotinp that q tam
norarv mandate hp iesun3 to roenond.
ant and h.fora ench mandate wae
i.snod hn conformpd to tho docieion
If the Conrt and called the mantinp
IN ouestion. that the affidavit SIM
nortiro tho notior of January DIST
for the issue of the neremntorv writ
.at forth the fact that such montino
was duIv called and held and that
the action of the Court under the cir.
rpmstances was erroneous in law
This morton was aroued on the last
dav of the Januarv term and ie the
present issue before the Court.
As NAV be seen bv the history of
the proceedings above set forth the
orioinaI case was disnosnd If NV the
decision Of Octoher 2ath and only
raonired tbe issne of the neremntory
writ therohv ordered ta he fulIy
+.r,oirotad noromntory writ If
mondamus beino in the nature of =
final iudgment or decree II was in
order for fine clerk to i.sne the writ
at anv fine after the decision d;roct-
ino if IN he issued had heen filed
TGis VOC tbn Wow tho C,urt bold
whom the motion Of tho ne,itionnrs
cana mn and the motto, vas orant.
cd rather hpcauso Of thp ORIGINAL do.
nision If the Court that . noranntorv
Writ ho ;ocnad tban on ocnonrt If
tho motion mr. anvthino IN tbo offi.
da,it Ornnortinrit Eron, thie s+ond-
no;nt tha raono4da,t ,,.o ~ nowi,o
nraiudicnd nv bis ahsancaat thn nro-
lorto+;on of So;d motto,
VII. ....,.
issnp NJ the writ subsequent 70 his
nprformance Of the dntv winch the
Conrt had decided he oHgbt 70 nor.
form and for which tho noromntnrv
writ was diractpd to no issnod If no
has 60 nprCormed if . for the writ is
the nrodurt of the decision and is in.
dissolublv connected with it. and if
tLoro l. a doIov in ;ss,;nn i oS in
tho casa before tho Conrt i has
whom iosnod ratroCnectivo action