The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-10-24

Defendant Company Files
It's Answer.
In thu Suit Recently Brought
Against I: by One OF Its
Own Stockholders,

In the Circuit Court yesterday an
answer was filed by the Hawaiian
Tramways Company in the injunction
suit instituted against it by I. :.
Southwick. Following are the princi-
pal matters set up in the answer
which is quite lengthy:
"On information and belief defend
ant denies that SoGthwick is a inem-
Der of or stakeholder in defendant cor
poration.
Sets up that by virtue OF the grant
of the Legislature of the Hawaiian
Kingdom, known as Chapter Is of the
Session Laws of 1886. il is authorized
to occupy and use either a single or
double track on King street.
Admits that il is now occupying
one track on King street and is now
tearing up said street for the purpose
of laying a second track; admits that
il threatens to use electric power for
the propulsion of it's cars along said
rails by the overhead trolley system.
provided il has the legal right and
power to do so; but denies that IL in
tends to use such power unless its
right to- do so is established by proper
proceedings before the proper authori-
ties. Defendant denies that in the do
ing of the acts alleged in the bill or
otherwise it threatens to or is eXpend-
| ing any large sums OF money, or Is
| lessening by any act the value OF plain
| tiff's stock or jeopardiZing his interests
| therein.
Defendant admits that the MAORI
| ~ of the board of directors have been
and are assuming powers to- act in all
| matters in the premises and asserts
| that they are so acting with the con-
sent and approval and by the authority
of the majority of the stockholders
but denies that any OF the acts com
planned of are illegal.
Defendant further asserts that the
acts complained of were commenced 4
long time prior To the purchase by
| the complainant of his shares. and that
! il was well known by the plaintiff n
and prior to- the time OF purchasing
| said shares that said acts were in con.
| temptation by the defendant corpora
| ton and were being carried out.
And defendant further answering
| says that the action brought by plain
tiff is not brought in good faith or fol
a proper purpose, and on information
and belief AYERS that the plaintiff /:
an employee of one w. X. Castle: that
| the said w. X. Castle is now and at the
time of the commencement OF this ac'
ton was a stakeholder in a certain
corporation known as the Honolulu
Rapid Transit Il Land Company anC
attorney for the same"
Further answering. the defendan
says that on the 18th day of OCtobe
the said plaintiff became the purchase
of twenty shares of the capital stock o
defendant by endorsement of one W
+. Allen. the real holder thereof, am
that no transfer was entered upon tn
books of said corporation of the chang
of ownership between Allen and tn
plaintiff. and that the plaintiff at tn
time Of the commencement of this sui
was not and is not now a member o
the defendant corporation; that sal
purchase was made by plaintiff at tn
| instigation of and for the benefit q
the Rapid Transit Company. and tina
the plaintiff purchased said shares fo
the purpose of instituting this suit an
other litigation against defendant 10
the benefit of the Rapid Transit Com
pany, and that this suit was com
menced on the day on which the plain
tiff acquired said shares. Defendau
further AYERS that the acts complaine
of were done by 1t and it's servants fo
the benefit of its stockholders, tendin
to enhance the value of the shares hel
by them and to increase the dividend
payable thereon.
Defendant prays that the injun.ctio
be dissolved and that the action he dis
missed, with costs.