The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-10-17
THE tram Way co.
Moves to Dissolve the
Injunction.
Affidavit Gf Manager Pain and q
Letter from the Rapid Transit
CompanS's Attorney.

In the case 81 Thomas =. SuutJNtCk
vs.. the Hawaiian TTamways Company.
a bill for injunction. the defendant
yesterday fled n motion In the Circuit
Court to- dissolve the injunction here
the affidavit of W. II. Pain. OF which
the following IS n copy:
AFFIDAVIT OF WA. Ii. PAIN.
Hawaiian Islands, Island OF Oahu. -
VIM. II. Pain, being duly sworn. ON
his oath deposcs and SAYS: That ath-
ant is the general manager OF defend
ant and as such has the control and /
management OF the property and bust
ness OF defendant; that this action |
was commenced on the 18th day OF Oc-
toter, y. ID. 1899, and process served |
upon him on the morning OF that day:
| that this honorable court in said ac-
ton granted its Injunction enjoining
the defendant 1ts servants, agents and
| attorneys from tearing up and eNcaVa-
| ting King street for the purpose of
| constructing second track along said
| hing street, and from laying "A g.Tdcr
| rail- bound with copper bonds on said
hlhg street, and from using electric
| power Tor tie propulsion of its ears
| along said rails by the overhead troll
| ley system with posts erected in said
| street to carry the overhead wires
used in connection with said system
| until the further order or decree of
this court; that under an act of the
legislature OF the Kingdom of Hawaii.
designated rs Chapter NVIII of the
Session Laws Of 1856. the right was
granted to- the assignor OF defendant.
William r. Austin, to construct. Law
down, maintain and operate a single
track street railway with all the nee
cssary curves, switches and turnouts
or double-track street railway through
certain streets in Honolulu mentioned
in said act, and among said streets.
through King street, the street men
toned in plaintiffs bill. which right
was granted upon this condition.
among others: that the rails used in
making track shall he fiat rails only.
and in no case shall the use of + rails
De allowed; that on the 9Th day al
June, 1899. this afiiant notified the
Minister OF the Interior of the defend
ants intention to- lay a double track
on King street, and that on the 2isj
day Of July, following. the Executive
=. Council of the Republic of Hawaii
passed its resolution permitting de.
PENDANT to lay such double track: that
Immediately after the adoption OF said
resolution defendant began its work
and continued tn do so. in conformity
s | with the conditions of the act afore
| said, until eDioined by the order al
this honorable court; that on the 9th
day Of October. 1889, the ExeCutiv,
Council aforesaid approved the use o
the rail which WAS laid by defendant;
that from said DIST day OF July. 1899
the defendant was tearing up and ex
Cavating said King street for the puT'
] pose of constructing n second tracl
| along thereof. and that the fact OF de
, | fendant's doing said work was u mat
= ter of public Dotoriety in Honolulu
, mentioned and discussed in the news
papers published therein; that on DC
tober 10. 1899, defendant received
{ communication from w. II. Castl,
s Esq, attorney for the Honolulu Rapi,
I Transit q Land Company. a cop!
s whereof is hereto attached and made
s part hereof. marked Exhibit a: tina
: afiiant is informed and believes tina
plaintiff is = clerk of said w. v. Castle
and that any stock which he may hav
. acquired by transfer or assignment
= does not stand in his name upon tn
. books OF defendant, and was acquire
between the 10th of October and tn
18th of October, 1899, the time of tn
, commencement Cf this action. an
, was so acquired solely for the pu-pos
q If insti;uting this action and OF veS
2 ing, harassinG and impeding the IL
8 PENDANT in its legitimate business; an
. afiiant further says that no attemI
. has been made By defendant. or II
> agents or servants, to use electric pow
9 ~ for the propulsion of it's cars. nC
8 have any threats whatever been mad
10 do so; and that no Illegal act wha
ever has heei done or threatened to
= done in the carrying on of the bus
= ness or laying of the track of defen'
y ant Affiart further says that the &C
done by him as agent and servant
% defendant are not beyond the power
= defendant; and that no interest
= plaintiff in the defendant corporate
4 is being jeopardized by any act OF d
& PENDANT; hut that, on the contrary, .
q the acts heretofore done or contempt
& ted 10 he done by defendant are for Il
5, ] benefit of the stockholders OF the co
g roration.