Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1897-10-07
ANOTHER DECISION QUOTED
Child That Lived Only One Day Changed
Descent Of Property.
All Of Queen Emma'S Estate Not in Question
Words on Which the Issues
viii Depend.

II should be stated that the
whole of the Queen Emma estate
is not involved in the claim of
Col. Rookie Of England. The late
Queen Dowager had property in
her own right, besides what she
took from the Rookie estate.
Besides the case of Hemen vs..
Kamakaia, quoted in this paper
yesterday, there is another in the
same volume of Hawaiian Re.
ports, No. 10. 1t is Booth VS..
Baker, at page 543. This may
also have a bearing on the Queen
Emma estate litigation. In Booth
VS.. Baker it appeared that Malie
Kahai died on August Is, 1894,
having made will the previous
year by which she devised all her
property, real and personal, to
her niece, Elizabeth K. Baker, for
her life. The devisee was not to
dispose of any of the property to
anyone, and if she should have
child then all the property should
60 to that child.
Elizabeth married 9. w. Booth
and a child was born to them,
which lived but one day. The
Supreme Court found that at the
death of the testatrix, 'Malie Ka-
hal, the unborn child or children
of Elizabeth had contingent re.
mainder or fee in the estate, but
the contingent remainder became
vested one in the child as soon
as it was born. "The vested re-
mainder here is one of inheri-
tance," the Court said, "and on
the death of the child it passed to
its heirs, who are, by our statute
Of descent, the father and mother
as tenants in common"
1t was provided in Malie Ka.
hairs will-in this being very
similar to DR.. Rooke's-that if
Elizabeth should die with
out children or descend
ants, then all the property
shonld descend TO tho tun vonncar
sisters of the said Elizabeth.
These were the defendants in
the case. 1t was decided
by the Court that the
estate of Elizabeth X. Booth in
the property was one for life, and
the remainder was in her and her
husband as tenants in common,
subject to open to let in other
children of Elizabeth that might
be born thereafter. Also, that the
defendants had no interest in the
property, "for the birth of Eliza
beth's child defeated the limita.
ton to them" Further: "No
estate in perpetuity is created in
Elizabeth in the property
by the will of Male Kahai,
and Elizabeth does not have an
estate tail in the property"
Thomas Charles Byde Rookie,
M. d., died November %, 1858,
six months after the Prince OF
Hawaii was born to Kan ehameha
Nv. and Queen Emma. His rela
tive now contesting the title OF
his estate, Col Rookie, will rely
on these words of the will
"Should the said Emma Rookie
decease without leaving ISSUE
ETC.. while the Queens Hospital
trustees will rely on an indefeasi-
BILE estate created both by the will
and by the birth and death of the
, Prince of Hawaii, the will con-
tanning the provision that the pro-
perty was ito be used and enjoy
ed by her during the term of her
natural life, and her children for
ever"
There may be a point raised
on the English language of DIR,
Rockies will, as to the words
"without leaving issue" having in
that language an unambiguous
meaning. The wills in the two
Hawaiian cases here cited were
written in the native language,
and therefore the intent of the
testators might have been harder
| To cOnstrue.