The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1894-08-31
CULLINGS FROM COURT.
THE QUEEN DowAGER WINS THE
FAMOUS LAND CASE.
The Deed and Receipt of Kalakaus Ad-
judged to be Frauduient-Points
In Decision.

A decision in the case Of Kapiolani
VS.. S. w. Mahelona was rendered by
Judge Henry K. Cooper Wednesday. In
this cause the plaintiff alleged that a
certain deed, dated November 10, 1890,
wherein the defendant is mentioned as
grantee, and is purported to have been
signed by his late Majesty Kalakaua, is
false, fraudulent aud forged, and prays
that said deed may be delivered up and
cancelled and that the defendant may
be perpetually enjoined from exercising
any right of ownership over the several
parcels OF land therein described and
from alleging any title under the deed.
In order that the plaintiff might pre-
vail it was necessary to establish the
fact that the name Of Kalakaua had
been forged to the disputed deed, and in
so doing, to find that at least five Ha-
waiians have been guilty Of conspiracy
TO defraud their ALI out OF valuable
track of land.
The direct evidence for the plaintiff
consisted of the testimony OF several
witnesses who we're experts in the
hand writing of the late King;
they were shown many signatures adj
mitted to be genuine interspersed with
those in question. Without going into
details it mag be said that all the wit
nesses were of the opinion that the sig
nature upon the deed and receipt were
not genuine.
The Judge takes all of the testimony
in the case and decides that the follow
ing notable circumstances tend to inn
peach the credibility of the witness for
the defense:
The disparity of consideration, $4,000
being named in the deed while the
property conveyed is shown to be worth
$4,000.
The failure of Isaac Sherwood to in
form the administrator in regard to this
conveyance when he was employed by
him to assist in accounting for the assets
OF the estate.
Improbability that the King should
have selected such a day to transact an
important business matter.
The failure to acknowledge the deed
after its execution.
The alleged delivery of the deed to
Sherwood who is the son-in-law of the
defendant.
The marked difference in the color OF
the ink said to have been obtained from
the same inkstand and used alike by the
King and the three witnesses to the
deed.
The very striking resemblance between
the three disputed signatures and the
writing in the body of the writ and the
letter admitted to have been written by
Isaac Sherwood.
The delivery Of the deed by Sherwood
to Mahelona after the Kings death and
before any survey had been made in
accordance with the directions of the
King.
The patched up condition of all the
small ks in the receipt, and lastly, the
evidence of the plaintiff in rebuttal of
the fact that Isaac Sherwood was in
Honolulu on the 18th of November,
1890. Although there are several dis
crepences in this testimony, yet, taken
as whole, it carries with it convic-
ton that as to the main point it is true.
Judge Cooper goes on to say: 1.-THE
whole evidence introduced by the
plaintiff when reviewed as such is con-
vincing even beyong reasonable doubt
that her allegation as to the fraudulent
nature of the deed must be confirmed.
81 do not attempt to account for this
most extraordinary effort on the part OF
the defendant and those connected with
him in this affair, to utter such an
instrument as this, thereby endeavorine
to defraud the widow of their former
sovereing and employer out of 9
large portion of their estate.
"The prayer of the bill is granted and
decree will be signed accordingly"
The property in question is the lane
of the late King, at Kalihi.
F. w. Hatch for plaintiff, G. w. Ash
ford for defendent.