The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1898-10-08
In THE SUPREME COURT OF THE HAWAIIAN
ISLANDS,
KEMILIA HOLT =. KAAUKAI
JUNE TERM, 1898.

Under Section
her a husband
writing
OPINION THE COURT JUDD cJr Trea j., dssentng).
This is eecmen for portion by Royal
Patent IVA and Royal Patent 6515 O. c. A. 1882
Hamakua Hawaii. Defendant disclaimed threeourths
land claimed title by inheritance to the other
fourth The Circuit Court jury waived found for the plain
tiff the treefouts discamed and for the defendant
to the other fourth Plaintiff brings the to this Court
Exceptions. The land time belonged Keaweopaa,
upon death Kaopua and daughter
Maiau who together afterwards the 18th November 1876
executed deed of the plaintiff Kemla and her sister Rode
daughters Kaopua. claims under this deed and
release from Rode.
When this deed executed Kaopua had wife, Honuawa
and Malau had husband the defendant haaukal neither OF
whom joined in gave any written the deed
Maau afterwards died. leaving her only heirs her brother
Kaopua and her husband Kaaukai defendant Evidence
offered by plaintiff show that Kaaukai assented orally his
conveyance nadmsbe by the Court
which ruling exceptions taken If the we deed
void for of the husbands onder written he
would upon her death have inherited onehaf of her interest
that onefou of the whole land and the only question sub
tted the exceptions whether under the Statutes then in
force wfes of her land valid if made with
the oral of her husband.
Section 1897 of the Civil Code the of the
execution of the deed, provided that *The wife :
band and cviy dead She shall without his consent,
less stipulated by legal make
contracts ALLEVIATE and dispose of property except under
certain circumstances involved in this By the pre-
Section 1885, the husband responsible for the debts
of her which
he could lease with her written for exceed
that of his natural life
If called upon o this Statute Immediately
upon might open hold that the
to
be made, it might be either written oral.
This Statute Section first enacted in (see Vol
page Laws of 1916 reenaced in the language
in the Civil Code of 1859
-Four years before the question made Chief
Justice Allen held that wife could convey her lands
her husband and added neither wife convey her
lands stranger unless her husband joins in the
Cun',ainsr Wond, Haw. 90. Decided in 1872
In 1881 in Nauelu Aud, i'd, 297 held by JUS
tice of this Court that the wife without her husbands
consent make ALLEVIATE dispose of her property
her and conveyance which her husband
by joining in their execution, void and convey
nothing The Justice from his familiarity with the rulings of his
declares that h principle has been frequently laid
down by different judges of this court"
In these reported the Justices make distinction
the husbands joining in the wifes deed and Consent
ing thus assuming that the husbands joinder would be
his method of asserting it. We agree to this proposition
And draw that husband join
written deed without his appearing it, the
that his writing when it said that oning
in the deed was his consent"
Since these decisions the public has acted upon them and real
property has passed by descent in accordance with these pn
cples Conveyances of real belonging married
made generally the principle that order
to the va1y we deed of her land
must be evidenced by writing
the does say that oral of the
may be proved validate such deed and there good
holding that the must be in writing should
hesitate to hold would be destructive of many valuable
titles country To allow oral evidence of he hus
bands consen which would validate otherwise void deed
leaving the uncertain of abe and possibly
would be within the spirit of the Statute OF