The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1894-05-25
OPINION OF THE COURT By JUDD, c.

On the 18Th Of April LAST defend
snt wzs brought before the District
Magistrate OF North Hilo. Hswsu.
By warrant sworn out by the Lsups
hoehoe Sugar Company. charging
him with having deserted work.
The defendant Is lsborer in the
employ Of the plsintiff corporation
under 6 written contract duly made
sid executed, secording 20 the stat
utes applicable, on the 9Th Septen-
Der. 1928, by which the defendant
sgrasd 70 work for plaintiff for the
term Of twerty-fOur months ST stipu-
listed wages. The defendant moved
tor dismissal Of the case ~on the
ground tbs. according u the con
trsct II he stayed Of day he vas
bound - work two, therefore ss the
punishment was prescribed IN the
contract the Court could not impose
s punishment II the case
The contract eOutSirsd the follow
irg clause. Section iii The party
q the second part further agrees TO
SO-k 81 night and rest during the
isy. wherever directed 70 do 50. srd
II s6seCs from work without the con
sent O the party Of the first part or
is SCENTS. that he vii perform two
6sys service for every working day
- s5secr-E
Ice District Magistrate granted
/ the motion aud dismissed the csse.
TIE plaintiff then appealed TO this
Court OF the point Of law involved
sd TIE parties stip1lzted II writing
I thai tie Justices Of the Supreme
I Curt might hear the case II vscs-
tioc ard give .13gusut g il te-u
tine
/ b. the Court There vas 8 stat
I TIE formerly existing under tEe
Masters ard Servants Act that II
I Csc : person lawfully bound 70 ssr
I yiee zbsected himself truu s1eh seq
I We without leave q his usstsr the
I justice cO1Ii eoupel the Isbcre- 70
sz-ve III l. sIcsed double tie time
{ @: his sbs=res. This vas repealed
/ b. C1sp- 5 Laws q 1SS2- We Do
Z E1s kEJE. CcE : Il psrtI-e-t 70 o1r
{ case 70 eCg11-5. Why s1el E clause
Ezs been Inserted Il the sEreeusct
before u which / Il : p-lrisd tJ-u-
/ TIE clause h which the Iz5orsE
Ggress % ps-tCru ts0 days service
tCr every working day absent frOu
Ecrk esc1ot g. specifically enforced
by the lsE s. L stands Such clause
: vzl1elass s. : remedy TO the en-
{ p-Cy5r. eIespE peEEzps that 3 suit
Z might Be b-o1ght Gpo1 Il sf-zr the
e1p5rstion q tire tenn f1E damages
I IN brssch q contract
{ TIE cIsuss II. being specifically
enforceable. tbs; / By Compelling
tE= Isborer 70 Do exactly what he
zErsed 70 d.. and perform two days
I Il lsbor t1- every days sbseCce. Il
dos e: displsee tie rsusdy pzo-
Ei5e6 by lzE. which i f1E the tEs.
ElIItuu shsence the Magistrates
I ordering hin 20 re-lr1 70 ssrTics
ard PAY cus1s sni fo< the nsIt a.
ss-ce : fire rCt 70 eIceed IS and
casts Eri to- s1bssg7eut sbssnees :
sEe Dcs % e1oeed SO and eosts,
ard Iupris0uue1s st hard lsbor
Until paid We hold that the els1ss
Z q tbs c0zrzct 1Ddzr dlsc1ssz01
zEnris g cozc1rTels remedy Only, 70
s1e e1pl0yer, and does lat pEsEsut
tbs employer from rss0rtlng TO TIE
I statutory ue.hod Of elf1Eesozu- uOE
sta EziEs. 3! TIE employer q lis
Eight 20 szch sEfoEcsDect-
Appeal sustained ard tie defend
art : 0z1zrsd 20 rst1rn TO his en-
ploFer's service AID pay eost=-
4 s Hsr1Eel foE plaintiff
Ho1Olul1- May = 1881