The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-12-04
PRICE is
SOARING
The Pearl Harbor
Suit Still on
Trial.
HIGHER VALUES
BY EXPERTS
W. G. Ashley Says the Land if
Improved and Plated is Worth |
100000. All Told.

clned to give the Bishop Estate the
benefit in their valuations of the land
examined by them. During the day but
three witnesses were on the stand, Cap
tain Merry, Allan Herbert and w. G.
Ashley.
Captain ]. F. Merry testified simply
to the exchange of letters between the
Bishop Estate and himself when, two
years ago. he secured an option on
the land at the request of the Navy
Department At that time the trustees
gave him an option upon the desired
land at fifty dollars an acre, for one
year, and the letters in proof of this
were introduced as evidence.
w. G. Ashley of the real estate firm
of Ashley & Paris was the next witness
He was formerly secretary IF the Oahu
Railway & Land Co., at the time the
railroad was constructed through the
Bishop Estate land, and examined the
Hand at that time. He was of the opin-
ion that fifty dollars an acre would be
a fair market price for the six hundred
acres taken as q WHOlS.
On cross-examination by Mr.. Kinney
the latter drew out some favorable adj
missions relative to the value of the
water front cut up into beach lots.
The witness stated that land in Pearl
City was worth about $500 per acre
lot. The two mile frontage he thought
might be worth 800 an acre. and If cut
up into town lots with improvements.
such as water, railroad facilities, grad
| ing, etc. eighty lots with frontage on
the sea would be worth about 5000, 900. !
without improvements witness did not |
believe they would be worth over
5000.
Witness testified that an acre of SUI
gar land would produce eight and half
tons of sugar which would be worth
about $64O. The ground rental at three
and half per cent would be about so
per annun.
do you mean to say that the land
will yield eight and half tons of sugar
to an acre?" asked the court,
Yes, sir" answered Mr.. Kinney. do
you want to hear evidence on that point
now. We intend to show later that the
land in question would yield ten tons
per acre"
sand the land has never produced
crop" put in Mr.. Dunno.
"All the more reason why it will pro-
duce more now," said Mr.. Kinney.
Figuring or the basis suggested by ,
Mr.. Kinney the witness thought the su-
gar LAND would be worth about S14o To
5000 an acre. About half of the land
was sugar land. he thought. The wit E
ness would not commit himself as to
the relative values for investment pur-
roses Of sugar land leases and Terri
torial onds
Allan Herbert, the expert who made z
a special visit to the land at the request
of the government. was on the stand o
for the greater part of the afternoon. ,
He placed value of twenty-five dollars
an acre upon the Kuahua Island tract, !
and thought the cane land on the
mainland was worth about 500 an acre.
Fifty dollars an acre was a fair valua-
jion for the land taken as whole. He =
said there was but one well on the land, !
and the water in it was slightly brack-
ish. The witness declined to place
the Eva Plantation or Fords Island.
stating that he was unable to do jus
tice to himself in making such an es- .
innate. He said he had only been to
the shore OF Ford's Island and at that
time he was SO occupied with the ladies
and with lunch he paid no attention
to the condition of the land there,
though he was under the impression :
that it was rocky.
He thought that the Bishop Estate
lands condemned by the government
were the poorest in the district, but
with proper care and fertilization SUI I
gar, corn or grape crops might be rails
ed upon part of 1t. Mr.. Herbert pro-
fessed ignorance of what amount of SUI !
gar could be raised on this land if II
was cultivated and said he preferred 1
not to make estimates on probabilities. .
He expressed his inability to answer
n@sr-y every question put tt hIIn by M.
Kinney until finally that gentleman
asked angrily:
What business have you here swear s
ing away the rights Of the Bishop Es- 3
tate, II you don't know anything about (
this land? You are here as an expert?''
Judge Estee refused to allow the Z
question, and criticised It as not proper :
to be put to the witness. The court .
held that Mr. Herbert was not swear
ing away anyOnes rights and such a s
question was clearly improper Mr.
Kinney cOntended that the question
was proper upon cross-examination, but 4
the court ordered it stricken from the
records.
The examination of Mr. Herbert was a
completed before the evening adjourn