The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-11-07

| transferred to the plaintiffs in this ac-
| ton, and that said plaintiff is a for
| eign corporation doing business under
| the laws Of Great Britain The petit
ton then sets out in paragraph 4. the
! granting to the Hawaiian TramWays
Company, on November IL 1890, of the
right to maintain electric traction and
in paragraph 5. the amendment to the
charter passed August IA, 1895. In
paragraph the plaintiff sets out that
the street railway has been operated
under that charter. and that il is
valuable asset In the hands of plain
! tiff.
Paragraphs Z, and 9 of the COM
plant allege that on July Z, 1898,
charter was granted to the Honolulu
Rapid Transit Company, and a corpor-
alton has been organized to take over
| the charter. and that the act of the
Legislature of the Republic of Hawaii
constitutes the alleged charter OF the
defendant.
The further grounds for action of the
Hawaiian Tramways Company is set
out in the concluding paragraphs of the
petition, as follows:
TO- Your orator further alleges and
shows that the said charter of said
| defendant and respondent, and every
| part and portion and section thereof
are wholly unconstitutional. null and
void; in this, that said charter and
4 CehOA anu every part ana portion ana
section thereof is in conflict with the
constitution of the United States of
America, and in this, that said char
ter and each and every part and por-
| ton and section thereof, is in conflict
with the laws of the said United States,
and, in particular, with that certain
| act of the first session Of the Fifty
sixth Congress of said United States.
approved April 20. 1900 and entitled
/ AN Act to provide a government for
| the Territory of Hawaii" and publish
ed under the direction of the Secretary
| of State of said United States, as chap
| ter 3S9 in and of the thirty-first vol
ume of the statutes at large of the
United States of America, commencing
at page 141.
IL. Your orator further shows that
notwithstanding that said charter of
said defendant and respondent was and
is unconstitutional and null and void
as herein above alleged, and notwith-
standing that said defendant and re-
Spondent is entirely without any rights,
privileges or franchise in the premises,
or flowing from or authorized by said
alleged charter, or otherwise, or at all,
nevertheless said defendant and re-
spondent claims the right under and
pursuant to said void charter to lay
street railway tracks in King street,
at Palama, in said Honolulu, notwith-
standing that such claimed right can
OIly OG cASTClSeu ny II III
of the prior valid rights of your ora
tor under its franchise, and the laying
of such street railway tracks will in
terfere with and impair the beneficial
enjoyment of the prior valid franchise
of your orator, and will work irrepara-
bic injury thereto; and in this behalf
your orator shows that said King
street Is a public street In said city
of Honolulu. through which your ora
tor is authorized by law under q valid
franchise, prior to any pretended or
asserted claim of said defendant and
respondent, to operate, and does oper-
ate. under its said franchise. its said
street railways; that said defendant
and respondent has unlawfully land
forcibly entered in and upon said King
street, adjacent to. alongside Of, and
parallel with the street railway tracks
of your orator. for the purpose of con-
structing, maintaining and operating
a street railway in and upon said
King street. and said defendant and
respondent has, for a distance of more
than LOO feet thereon, dug up the sur
face. and torn up and removed the
paving from said King street, and is
now engaged in tearing up and in
making excavations in said street for
said purpose, and has SO occupied and
INSTRUCTED and does now so occupy and
obstruct said street with horses, men,
tiinbers, steel rails and other obstruc-
beneficial enjoyment by your orator OF
its aforesaid franchise, to wit, the OPP
Grafton as aforesaid of its said street
railway, to the great and irreparable
injury OF your orators said franchise
and property; and in this behalf, your
orator further shows that, unless re-
strained and enjoined by this court,
said acts and conduct Of said defend
ant and respondent will continue, and
will continue to work irreparable in
jury and damage to your orator; and
that your orator is wholly without any
plain, speedy or adequate remedy at
law In the premises. Your orator fur
ther shows that the alleged acts and
conduct of defendant and respondent
herein above referred to are an unlaw-
full intermeddIing with, interference In
and obstruction against the rights of
your orator in said street, and in the
and operation of its said
street railway therein, and in the ben |
eficiaI enjoyment of it's said franchise /
therein: that, unless enjoined and re- !
by this court, said acts and !!
conduct will continue; and that unless
enjoined and restrained by this court,
said acts and conduct so continuing,
will work irreparable injury and dam
age to your orator. for which your