The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1899-10-18
THE HOLT ESTATE.
Supplemental Report of
the Master.
Securities OF the Estate Civ n
Thorough ExaminatIon-Loss
Incurred to be Borne Equal

oHlltHs dS dHlfbAlNtN ~
examine the accounts of the Holt Es-
tate, has submitted the following sup
Elemental report to the court:
MASTERS SUPPLEMENTAL RE-
PORT.
| now ask leave TO file this as a sup
Elemental report TO my report filed on
the 9Th instant:
I have repaired to- the office OF Bruce
Cartwright, trustee, for the purpose OF
examining all the securities belonging
TO this estate.
The oldest note is the one given by
John ID. Holt Sr., mortSagor. for the
sum of 81 ,6SS.06. which has been re-
duced TO. a balance of $500. II was
accepted by the late James w. Austin.
the then trustee, on October q. 1870.
and is secured by the mortgagor's
81 500 policy of insurance on his life is
sued by the Equitable Society OF New
York. 1t appears to- the master that
this loan is secure. in view of the fact
that tn trustee pays over to- the mort
gagor as beneficiary OF the estate only
what remains of his share of the in
come in this estate after deducting
what is due and owing by the bcnefi-
ciary to the estate.
The only security which has unfor-
tunately proved loss to the estate was
mortgage given by one William H.
Cummings on some real estate situate
in Wailuku. Island of Maui. The note
FOR the same was originally So 500. and
upon foreclosure. the property brought
the sum of only 800. the houses on
the land having been secretly sold and
removed from the land without the
mort
After the foreclosure proceedings.
judgment was procured by the trustee
against said Cummings. who. IL ap-
pears. was a Government beneficiary
and was drawing a salary. for the bal
ance due upon his note. This judg-
ment enabled the trustee to garn.shee
70 per cent of Cummings salary up to-
the time the new Audit Act went into
effect, since which time nothing has
been collected upon the judgment. and
the sum of 81 ,i24.O5 is now the amount
short of the original loan. I find that
the mortgage on this loan was accept
ed February s. 1892. by the present
trustees predecessor. ~ j. Cartwright
who died July II. 1892. Question:
Upon whom should this loss fall? The
loan appears to have been made by the
deceased trustee in apparently good
faith, and another excuse offered is the
fact that said deceased trustee was not
in a position to personally inspect the
real property which was sold. ii being
situate on the Island OF Maui. y pre-
vious mortgage was exhibited to the
master showing that Messrs. Allen *
Robinson, merchants, accepted the
same property in security for their
loan of So. 80 to said Cummings. and.
in all probability. this transaction was
the cause of the late Mr.. Cartwright'S
acceptance of the security offered for
new loan upon the same property: IL
also shows that the late trustee was n
little more prudential than Messrs. Al
len & Robinson, for the amount OF their
loan was $3.50 more than Mr.. Cart
wright'S.
The foregoing circumstances were
narrated to the master in eXtenuation.
but whether or not they are sufficient
TO show that the deceased trustee had
used more than ordinary care or eau
ton in his acceptance of said loan. il
is solely for the court to- decide.
Should it be held that the loss fall
upon the estate. il is only fair that the
same should be equalized among all the
beneficiaries to be deducted from the
next rent distribution, as follows:
oue-lHlIu I'D ne borne by
James r. Holt Sr. ...S al 20
One-third To be borne by John
d. Holt Sr. ..... IA 80
One-third to be subdivided
into nine equal parts and he
borne by the heirs of o. j.
Holt .............. 47l o.
Total deficiency on Cum
ming'S loan I2i %
And whatever is collected hereafter
tho inl L.. To-.