The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-04-21

power DC Mr. King filed his bond and acted as
receiver In October 1897, having returned
Tahiti IN the month Of January previous moved the Circuit
Judge discharge the receiver the ground that the
appointing the receiver had acquired jurisdiction
his and estate and had jurisdiction appoint
anu II II Tai, no reason existed Tor continuing ms ser
vices and that Mr. Sumner Of sound mind and capable of
managing his estate Meanwhile the receiver had, with
the authority OF the court appointing HIM brought some suits
in reference Mr. Summers property and had defended
After various proceedings the stands that
receiver, signying his willingness resign his trust filed his
such which referred reported
thereon but the passed upon by the
Meanwhile petition to appoint guardian the person and
of John X. Sumner filed in the Probate Court upon
which various nterocutoy pleas and motions made, and
finally the 10th December 1891 the decided pro
coed further in the Of the discharge of the receiver
until the matter of the petition for the appointment Of guard
should be determined While not giving all the details
OF this litigation consider that have referred to it su
GENTLY understanding of the question Of the propey of
making the writ of prohibition perpetual
The statute authorizing the writ IS as follows:
Section Is. This mandate which issues in the of
the sovereign from the Supreme Court in from any
Justice thereof in vacation directed the judge and the party
suing inferior court fobiddng them proceed
further in the the ground that the cognnce of the
said does belong such court that the
collateral matter arising therein is beyond its Jurisdictions
that it Is not competent to decide it
We of opinion that the Circuit Judge had chambers
jurisdiction to entertain the bill of j. X Sumner cOmpos
tcn by his next friend Maria s. Davis against NJ +. Gran
dell to cancel the of attorney and for compen
aton and to appoint receiver 1t and denied
that in proper of equity has power appoint
In the before there pending action
property within Jurisdictions and an interest the prop
ery the part of the person applying. These usctona
facts appear the bill The question the necessity of
receiver in the particular uisdcona for this
be decided by the upon evidence John K Sumner
absent from this country and in California when the bill
fled and he subsequently went to Tahiti where he has resi-
dence and property interests and he had left person this
country authorized to care for his property other than the
respondent in the original NJ. F. Candell The aega
ton in the bill of Summers mental unsoudne valuable
order show that the defendant Crande had taken advn
tage of this condition in accomplishing the fraud But
also deemed essential in order authorize the friend
bring the suit and prina face showing made-uffcent
CrandcIL
the friend bring such bill before nquison found
by commissioners unacy disputed by the
Story ID vol of his Equity Jurisprudence, Sec. 1865, holds
that entertained in the English
equity on behalf of persons of weak mind brought bv the next
FRIEND where commission of unacy had been obtained and
decree made for protection of plaintiffs property, and liberty
given apply in unacy its application" High Re
ceive Sec 733 takes the view saying "a receiver
sometimes necessary for the preservation of the estate of
unat and while there but few reported the sub
the power of of equity thus interfere is unque
toned Beach Receivers, Sec 800 to the effect
and it cites several occasions when receiver be appointed
a lunatcs property.
Counsel for the writ review many of the English
which show the exercise by chancery of the jurisdiction to
appoint receiver the property of natc before nqus
ton found but they contend that there other ingredients
in the that gave the jurdicton where there
estate involved upon statutory ground
We do not deem # essential to discuss these cases because in
the before the had jurisdiction in equity upon
bill to cancel instruments procured by fraud, and the appoint
of receiver incidental anclay. Having the
power allow the petition for cancellation of the fraudulent
instruments be filed by the friend and the power to
adudcae the question the fraud and also the to
appoint receiver when deemed necessary, find that the
had jurisdiction to appoint the receiver and discharge
the writ prohibition this ground. But John X. Sumner
returned to this jurisdiction January 1 1897 If his friends
considered him compos why did they then proceed
have him put under guardianship? The receivershp
tnued until October of 1897 when by counsel Sumner asked
for the discharge of the receiver Why if Sumner
mcntis did he not ask Mr. J. a. King turn the property
him his arrival here? 1t Is asserted the
why he did that he of the belief that Mr. King
acting under power of attorney which he (Sumner had
him from Tahiti 1t does appear that he made any inquiry
ascertain the of his affairs. Mr. Summers mental
condition had been determined only upon pate showing
and without opportunity to Mr. Sumner defend and only
for the purposes of the original suit The object the
ownership had been accomplished upon Mr.. Summers
this jurisdiction The receiver should have been discharged
and the property passed to him.
We of opinion that the receivers accounts should have
been settled and the receiver discharged when the motion there
for made The had authority to continue its
jurisdiction. The tendency of petition for the appointment
of Safte