The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1892-03-02

-llcI retention Oh the pE(lntliI
wages either by virtue of the re-
4uirement of the permit or Of the
said written contract, and from en-
forcing the same, and for payment
of the moneys already retained by
the defendant from plaintiffs wages,
and also declaring the said written
to be void, or as alternative
relief that the court find that the
same was made under a mutual mis-
take, as TO the said stipulatiOns, and
decree that it be rectitied according
ly, and for general relief.
The bill was demurred to on the
following grounds: !. Whether or
not complainant is entitled to relief
inasmuch as the grounds Of CON-
plant are covered by chapter 81 CT
the laws of 1890 relative to the in
PRODUCTION of Chinese laborers, rails
ing the question of the validity Of
the same under the constitution.
.. The conditions of the contract
that the laborer shall return and as
to deduction of wages, do not consti-
tute duress on the part Of the de-
PENDANT, if covered by the terms of
the act of 1890.
The provisions Of the act of 1890
referred to and which are inserted in
full in the said permit and contract
as part of their stipulation, are as
follows:
1. That the Chinese labOrer who
presents this special residence per-
init for entry into this kingdom,
shall remain therein for term not
exceeding years.
2. That such Chinese labOrer
shall not engage in any other occu-
patton than that of agricultural
laborer, provided that the term
agricultural labor" shall be held
to include labor in sugar mills, rice
mills, and coffee mills and all labor
incident thereto, during his resi-
dence in this kingdom.
3. That if such Chinese laborel
shall be found out of employment al
any time during the term of his re-
sidence in this kingdom, or be en-
gagged in any other employment
than that of agricultural laborer, Oh
shall be found in this kingdom after
the expiration of the term of hi:
residence granted by this permit
he may thereupon be arrested and
held in custody until an opportunity
occurs to return him to China.
4. That One-fOurth of the money
due to such Chinese laborer as com.
pensation for work done shall be
retained by the employer each month
and forwarded by him to the Board
of immigration, to be by it deposit
ed in the treasury of the kingdom
as a special deposit, subject to the
order of the President of the BoarC
of immigration, and to be returned
by the said Board to such Chinese
labOrer upon his leaving the king
dom. Provided however, that sucl
detention and deposit shall cease
whenever the sum to the credit o.
such labofer shall amount to the sun
of seventy-five dollars. The sale
board shall have the authority tt
pay the return passage of sucl
Chinese laborer out of such sum 81
deposited. If such Chinese lahore
shall enter into any other employ
ment than that of agricultural labor
er or shall desert his employer, sucl
money so deposited may be forfeited
to the Hawaiian government.
5. That the said Chinese lahore
shall not be entitled to exercise tn,
rights of an Hawaiian citizen as t.
the term of residence or employ
ment while in the Hawaiian King
dom, but shall be restricted to thu
term of residence and employment
named in this permit.
6. That the said Chinese lahore
shall during the whole term of hi
residence in this kingdom be subjec
to all the rules and regulations o
the Board of immigration now o
hereafter to be made.
SECTION 4. The presentation O
such a permit by any person TO
admission into this kingdom, shal
be held to be a consent by such per
son to all of its terms, and shal
prevent him or any person on hi
behalf from denying the validity Q
the same in any manner Whatsoeve
in any conrt of justice.
SECTION 5. Any laborer desert
ing or leaving or refusing to do tn
work of the employer shall beside
the provisions of subdivision 3 @
section l be also subject to tn
penalties prescribed by law fo
desertion or refusal to work.
The central point of the contrc
versy raised by the bill and dc
murrer is the question whethe
under all the circumstances, tn
retention by the defendant {
the PLAINTIFFS wages as stated
is legal. The permit more tina
authorizes it, it compels il
and the law enacts that tn
presentation of such PERM
for admission into Hawaiian teri
tory shall be considered to be a cor
J sent by the holder thereof, to all il
terms. The plaintiff by his write
oorrooS fn Ioto,otSOY, +