The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-09-20

| hundred and fifty-twO, personally ap-
| peared before me T. Chas. Byde Rookie
and acknowledged the foregoing in
| Strument to be his last will and testa-
ment and that he had executed the
| same for the uses and purposes there
| in set forth.
(Signed) w. A. COOPER,
| Deputy Register
For reasons satisfactory to myself |
| have this day Withdrawn Robert c.
| Davis above mentioned from acting as
| executor of this my last will and tes-
| lament and nominated in MS stead
| William Webster Esq
| (Signed) T. CHAS. hyde ROOKIE,
Signed in my presence this 29th day
OF May, 1858.
(Signed) A. M'DTJFF
| Hawaiian Islands, Oahu, ss.-Be 1t Re-
membered
That on this Goth day of January, A
d., 1859, the foregoing written instru-
| ment was duly proved before me in the
Supreme Court of the Hawaiian Islands
as and for the last will and testament
of T. Chas. Byde Rookie, of Honolulu,
late deceased.
In testimony whereof | have here
unto set my hand and caused to be
tie seal vi the supreme court
at Honolulu the day and year above
written.
(Signed) c. NJ. ROBERTSON,
Associate Justice of the Supreme
Court.
JUDGE PERRY'S DECISION.
This is an action brought under the
statute to quiet title to certain lands
situate in this Republic and more par
ticularly described in a schedule at
tached to and made.a part of the dec
laratiOn.
The defendants demur to the decla
ration on the ground that it does not
state facts sufficient to constitute
cause of action.
The facts of the case, as disclosed
by the declaration, are as follows:
Thomas Charles Byde Rookie, of Ho-
nOiulu, died in the year 1858, being
seized in fee at the time of his death
of all Of the lands the subject of this
action, and leaving a will the prOvi-
sions of which, emitting portions i'm
material in a consideration of the is
sues now before the court, are as fol-
lows: Il give and bequeath all my
real and personal estate of what ma
ture or kind sOever to my wife, Grace
Kamaikui Rookie, to be used and en-
joyed by her during the time of her
natural life and from and Immediately
after her decease l give and devise the
same to my adopted daughter Emma
Rookie, = to be used and enjoyed
by her during the term of her natural
life and her children forever, but,
should the aforesaid Emma Rookie de-
cease before me, the said testator, or
decease without leaving any issue, then
| hereby give and bequeath the same
unto my nephew and GOdsOn, Cress-
unto my nephew and gOdson, Cress-
his heirs forever
Grace Kamaikui died shortly after
the teStatOr. On June 2, 1856, Emma
Rookie married Kamehameha w, King
OF the Hawaiian Islands, and. on May
20, 1858, by said marriage, she, being
then Queen Emma, had issue born, a
son, the Prince of Hawaii, who died
in the year 1862, leaving him surviv
ing both his father and his mother.
Kamehameha ". died November 80,
1868. Emma Rookie never remarked
nor did she ever have any other child
born to her; she died in the year 1885,
and by her last will and testament,
which was duly admitted to probate,
purported to devise the property in
question to the Queens Hospital.
The trustees under the will of b. p.
Bishop claim that the title to one
fourth of the lands described in the
schedule, upon the deceaSe Of the
Prince of Hawaii, became vested in
kmaehameha ", by inheritance, and
that the title to said One-fOurth was
vested in B. P. Bishop at the time of
her decease and that the same is now
vested in them, said trustees.
The Queens Hospital claims all of
said property as devisee under the will
of Queen Emma, while the plaintiff al
so claims all of the property under the
will of T. c. B. Rookie.
The demurrer raises the question of
the construction of the will of T. G.. B.
Rookie.
In constituting a will the courts
sole object is to ascertain from the
whole will, what was the intention of
the testatOr and to carry out that in
tention, provided it be not unlawful
or inconsistent with the rules of law.
This is too we'll settled in this juris-
dictiOn to need any citation of author
ity.
All concerned are agreed that in
and by the first clause of the will above
quoted, the testator intended to give
to his wife a life estate in his proper
".
In my opinion, it was the testatOrs
intention TO give to his adopted daugh-
ter, Emma Rookie, after the death of
his wife, a life estate, and that at her
death, if she survived him and left is
sue surviving her, the property should
go to her children absolutely, but that
if she should die before the testator