The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1901-12-03
Low VALUE
ON LANO
Fifty Dollars an
Acre is a High
Price.
(From Saturdays daily)


range of value placed by the govern
ment witnesses on the Bishop Estate
land condemned for the Pearl Harbor
naval station yesterday. The returns of
the trustees to the tax assessor in
dictate an even less valuation-three
dollars an acre and the highest price
given yesterday Is one-twelfth that
asked by the respondents. Probably the
most interesting feature of the day was
the rrling of the court, that the Ha-
waiiaa law fixed the value of property
taken by condemnation, at not more
than twenty per cent in excess Of the
assessed valuation. The ruling was
qualified however by the statement that
the court would construe this law very
literally and allow evidence by the de-
PENDANT to counteract such valuation.
Even from the government witnesses
the Bishop Estate attorneys drew some
admissions of a much greater value sn
similar sugar lands in the Eva basin,
though they stuck obstinately to their
valua ton of not to exceed nifty dollars
an acre on the condemned land. The
low valuation of sl2,496 placed upon the
land by the trustees was sought To be
counteracted by the showing that ii
was the general practice to value lands
at eight times the annual rental. Later
lease is to be introduced showing that
the Dowsett Estate has long lease for
5000 a year, and is responsible for taxes
upon the value of that lease. The valu-
alton at eight times the rental value
would have been but 5000 for the land,
or les than the amount returned The
valuation of ST., 1876 is upon over 1900
acres, including the six hundred acres
in dispute
DR.. j. S. McGrew was the first wit
ness for the government yesterday
morning. He qualified as an expert, by
stating that he had lived here thirty
six years and had visited Pearl Harbor
about twice week. Il think the piece
of land mauka of the railroad is worth
about five dollars an acre" said the
witness 1T is mostly lava rock with
little soil, and | don't believe it is worth
that much, except TO the United States
government" McGrew thought some
of the cane land was worth fifty dol
lars an acre, but he declined to put a
valuation on cane land generally. The
witness on cross examination said he
did not know of any sales of cane land
at fifty dollars an acre within the past
five years. The doctor thought that
lands that were of very little value be-
fore, suddenly increased in value with
annexation. Annexation brought sta
biity," he said, the boom values Of
lands are going down again now. |
don't think we are going To have any
more booms in sugar, We are getting
too many new possessions where sugar
can be raised"
FIVE DOLLARS AN ACRE.
George e. Boardman, the second land
expert put on the stand by the govern
ment, did not have even as roscate views
of tine condemned property did DIR.
McGrew. Five dollars an acre was all
he thought IL was worth, but with the
wharfage he raised his figures to 500 to
s25 an acre.
The land is rocky" said this witness.
much stone was taken from II for use
as ballast by the railroad. As a specula-
ton by private individual | would con-
slider S. an acre throwing away money
for the land on the right of the railroad.
| have visited the main body of land ana
been around 1t on a launch. The water
front certainly enhances it's value, but !
consider $50 to $50 an acre good price.
with the water privileges. | wouldn't
give anything for 1t for grazing. Years
ago I intended to promote a sugar plan
tation down there, and examined II, but
purpose"
On cross-eXamination witness said he
wouldn't give s. an acre for the land
without the waterfront, which he thought
was about half II mile in length. ON re-
direct examination he said that this was
only guesswork. CThe respondents allegt
that there is nearly three miles of water
front)
ASSESSMENT FIGURES.
The introduction of the assessment
blanks filed by the Bishop estate for tn,
past four years brought about an inter
esting legal fight, in which Judge Este,
delivered an opinion upon some of the
veXing law points in the case. Mr.. Kin
ney objected to the introduction of thes'
taxation figures, unless he was allowed
TO show by the assessor that the law per
mitted the return Of property at eign
times the rental value, and tLaI III,
% perty in question was under Ions
Sc to the Dowsett estate for $500
year The Court refused to allow testi
mony on this point, holding that all tn
law points involved would be eNplaine,
by him in the instructions to the jury a
the conclusion of the evidence. He ask
ed that each attorney submit to him b!
Monday copy of the instructions the!
desired.
In passing upon the question of Law
Judge Estee said THE statutes her
provide that in cases of land condemne
the jury cannot fix the value of the prop
erty at more than 20 per cent in eXces
of the assessed value. ! am inclined L
be liberal in this matter, however, an
will allow the respondent to bring Il
whatever evidence he may wish to shoy
the value of the land The Court rule
that the defendant cannot introduce an
testimony showing that the assessment
or lists returned to the assessor Were no
made in accordance win law. At pres
ent, the Court cannot instruct the jur
as to the law"
Assessor Pratt then identified the Ia
return introduced by Mr.. Dunno, tn
Court denying the request that he be a
lowed TO read the first page, on the oil
lection Of Mr.. Kinney that 1t containe
extracts from the taxation laws.
There were four returns introduced |
evidence In 1898 the blank was s'gne