The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1895-12-26

shift was made, beginning the list
| again, and Division Two received the
water in the day time and Division
one took il a. night, aud so on IL
enuiess rotation. We find this gen
| eral resume Of the water system OF
| Kauaula To be we'll established by the
/ positive evidence adduced 10y the
/ plaintiff, the admissions of many OF
! defendants witnesses, and the tesI-
| mony OF some of the defendants them
selves given IN suits between them
/ selves respecting water rights in this
! iO.alit,. The contention OF deieudau -
counsel il that while this method of
division did apply to the main body
Of the ahupuaa or iii mak4i, % did not
apply to the kalO lands mauka which
they claim had the right to cOntinu
Gus flow Of water. 1t seems that at
present all these abupuaas and ills of
land makai and large portion OF the
kuleauas within them n we'll as about
one-fourth in area # the kuleanas
containing kalO patches in the mauka
part, are Uwued by or under the control
Of the plaintiffs. About all Of the
area makai i in cultivation In sugar
cane, requiring water about once
week. In this discussion we
use the term ''day" IN an
ing day or night as the case
may be- The ancient method Of
using the water was this: Wuen the
''day' of certain ahupuaa, named
"KOok4" for example, came around,
the kaIo patches belonging to it aud
bearing the same name, being m 4uka,
had the water first run into them by
the lateral auwai until they were
filled, then the water would be turned
back into the main stream and then
taken out on To the lani below named
"KoOka.' But this gave the water
To the land below, planted in sugar
cane, only once in eleven days, which
was not often enough for successful
cultivation of cane, and therefore the
owners of the plantation began devi-
ating from the ''eleven day" system,
and would use as needed the water of
the days to which other ahuDuaas
were entitled on the ahupuaa whose
cane ueeded il. The plantation own
ing the ahupuaas and taking care that
tue kuleauas within them, not
owned by them, were filled before
the diversion was made were not
disturbed by the kuleana holders,
and the plaintiffs now claim that
they have acquired the right to do
this by twenty years continuous and
adverse use, that Is by prescription.
Possibly the plantation Eas not dis
turued by suits, since no one was in
iuriously affected by the change. But
having thus used the water upon the
lands they have acquired, indiscrim-
inately, without reference 10 the old
right in rotation of days and nights "a
fixed by the ancient system, the
pla utiffs claim aud urge that the
system must be strictly applied and
enroIc-o "a TO the kuieauas or ka!O
patches mauk4. In con-iier ing tins
We remark that thOdgh the water Of
this water course was undoubtedly
divided by some method or other in
ancient times, the method of division
of the water now sought TO be eufOr-
ced by the plaintiffs IS hardly fifty
wears old, and being the result OF the
planning OF several leading "kOnOhi-
kiSn or head men uuder the chiefs or
other persons (the laud Owners) as
sisted by the governor of the island, II
was more or less elastic according TO
circumstances. The konOhiki ell
deavOred TO secure equality of divisiD IN
I'D to avoid Troublesome quarrels be
tween tenants; and when the guam
tum of water in the stream was dImin
ished through drought he saw to ii
that the quantity used 10y each was
divided equally. The water from the
auwaI was subdivideu among the
various cultivalOrs according To the
amount of land cultivated and the
needs of each. But when one kule-
ana seemed to need more water than
others at any particular time the
konOhiki would on request allow
constant small stream of water TO
continue to run in the particular au-
wal, after the patches were filled and
while the the main body of the land
below was receiving its assigned sup
ply. This is called "kOii wal" and
witnesses say that when their patches
were dry they would ask and obtain Il
little water from the kODOhiki and
their own neighbOrs. If the plaintiffs
are "konohikis" of the various ahu-
puaas and ills owned by them and
are successors of the rights of the
konohikis and insist upon them, they
ought also TO hear the burdens and
ponsibilities of the konOhikls. But
supplies of water by permission do
not create right TO them and the
Court cannot compel favors to be
granted.
The testimony shows that during
good portion of the twenty years
last past the plantation had
not insisted that the "eleven
day" system of supplying the
water should be strictly executed,
but, about three years ago efforts were
made to cOnfiue the natives cultlvat-
ing the kaio land mauka to the old
system. Mr.. Campbell says that he,
when planting cane in Lahaina, relax
ed the system i'll times OF plenty. Mr..
Henry Smith, the present head water
luna of the plaintiffs, says that tine
rules that KahaulellO spoke about
1.-THE eleven day system) We're not
carried out when my predecessor was