The Hawaiian gazette., 1901-08-06
TWO CLAIM
$4OO,OOO
Answers Filed in
Pearl HarbOr
Suits.
From Saturdays daily }


Two of the respondents in the suit OF
the Government to condemn land foT
use as a naval station at Pearl Har
Dor filed their answers in the United
States Court yesterday, setting up a
claim for $500, 600 each, and demanding
a jury for the purpose of fixing the
amount of compensation.
The respondents answering yesterday
were the Honolulu Plantation Company,
which holds 400 acres on a 42-years
lease, and the oahu Sugar Company
which has "A lease of twenty years on
ISL acres, which, with railroad and 9TH
er improvements. is alleged to be worth
one million dollars.
| The answers of both corporations are
very similar in detail, making a gen.
eral admission of the facts relating to
description and ownership, and deny
ing specifically the tenth paragraph, in
which the Government alleges that the
land it seeks To condemn is worth but
$4,000. The answers are filed by Hatch
x Silliman and are nearly identical in
general outline. The Honolulu Planta-
ton Company sets up in paragraph 10
the following facts:
Respondent denies the allegations
contained in the tenth paragraph of
said complaint, and says that the value
of the said tracts and parcels of land
sought to be condemned and acquired
by the petitioner is not truly or cor
rectly stated in said paragraph: and
respondent says that it holds a lease
hold estate for a term of forty-two
years from September /. 1885, in and to
all that tract of land described in said
petition as portion A, containing an
area of 635 acres; that the rent of its
said leasehold estate Is by it paid up
in full to the ist day of September, 1908.
that out Of said tract of land an area of
400 acres. in consequence of the fertili-
ty of its soil it's low elevation and the
small expense with which 1t can be irri-
gated is peculiarly adapted to the cul-
tivation of sugar cane and has been
| prepared for such cultivation by the
respondent at great EXPENSE that said
tract has special and peculiar value to
this respondent for such purpose in
consequence of the establishment by
! the respondent of a sugar mill and
works for the manufacture of sugar,
and in consequence of the development
by respondent of a water supply for the
irrigation of said premises by means of
artesian wells, pumping machinery and
otherwise at an expenditure of seven
hundred and fifty thousand dollars and
over That respondent will be damaged
In the sum of $2OO,0 by the taking of
said premises by the petitioner, OF
which amount respondent claims the
sum OF f55, 055 for money actually laid
out and expended upon said tract of SOC
acres within three years last past.
lat& -, ,s.,., AA ssrAA ..
n Jury trial on the question of the
amount OF damage which will result to
II by said condemnation and taking OF
sa'6 lands by the petitioner"
The eleventh and twelfth paragraphs
are admitted to be true and the an
swer closes with the paragraph:
"Wht trefore said respondent prays
that said complaint may be dismissed
with costs
Hatch & Silliman are attorneys for
respondent
ANSWER OF OAHU SUGAR co.
The answer of the oahu Sugar Com
pany has few points of difference from
the foregoing 1t is alleged that re-
spondent has a twenty years leasehold
dating from October "A, 1899, consistin,,
of l5l.G acres on what is known ds
Furd's Island. The company furthe.
alleges that the land is particularly
fertile, and peculiarly adapted to tn.
cultivation of sugar cane. that respond
ent has provided an adequate watel
supply by digging artesian wells ano
est blshed transportation facilities BY
the construction of railroad, and has
also built a sugar mill and works the
total cost of which Improvement was
one million dollars. The respondent
further sets out that it will be dam
aged to the extent of 100000 If the
lands are condemned. of which amount
$4,000 has been expended within two
years past. A jury is asked to con
slider the question of damages.