The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1901-11-22
SR RAILROAD CASE THE MKY MEMORIAL LOST BAG AND BAGGAGE SHAW IS ON TIE RACK
SENSATIONAL ATTACK OK THE
TRAMWAYS.
Pain Says Neumann Had No Authority
TO Act-Certifed Articles Of Associa-
ton Not Filed.


ton Not Filed
The Hawaiian Tramways and Rapid
Transit fight was resumed this morn
ing in the United States District Court,
and the proceedings brought forth
some very interesting evidence. An
affidavit Of Treasurer w. II. Wright
was filed, declaring that there is no
certified copy of the articles of asso-
citation or the bylaws of the Hawaiian
Tramways company of London on file
in his office, as required by law, and
Pain took the stand to explain the
Supreme Court submission which he
now disclaims. The effects Of proofs
of the failure of the company to file
the papers required, would be to throw
ii out of every court in the Territory
and leave it with no standing, accord
ing to the Hawaiian statute. The sta
tute requires the filing of certified CO.
pies of five different documents by for
eign corporations, and as a penalty for
failure to file such documents its says
in section 20S3:
Section 2OS3. Every corporation
created by the laws of any other coun-
try carrying on business in this Re
public, which shall fail to comply with
the provision of the first section of this
statute, shall be denied the benefit of
the laws of this Republic, and parti-
cularly of the statutes limiting the time
for the commencement of civil action"
Pain was called to the stand by E. b.
McClanahan for the Rapid Transit
Company, which was represented by
l.. A. Thurston, w. r. Castle, Manager
Ballentyne and many interested stock
holders. j. j. Dunno and J. T. de Bolt
appeared for the Hawaiian TramWayS
Company.
The mule car company, which had
brought the original proceedings, was
decidedly upon the defensive in MAX
ing showing as to the authority of
Pain and his attorneys to appear. In
the face of repeated objections from
Dunno, the matter of the Supreme
Court proceedings We're first gone into,
the proceedings having been disclaim-
ed by Pain.
Were you present in the Supreme
Court at the time of the hearing be-
tween the Tramways and Rapid Tran
sit companies?" asked McClanahan.
Il was present-at the pretended sub
mission" said Pain.
Where abouts in the court did you
sit, on the mauka or makai side of the
rail?"
Judge Estee objected to the Hawai-
ian terms, and the question was put
again.
Il sat at the attorneys table" said
Pain.
Whom were you WITH"
mo one"
. who were at the other attorneys
tables?"
Judge Stanley and Paul Neuman."
What you were you there for?"
Just to look around"
'At what?"
"At the proceedings taking place"
THE proceedings between your COM
pany and the Rapid Transit company"
Yes"
Pain said the argument lasted two
days, and that he was not sure whether
he was there the second day.
Did you hear your attorney w. l..
Stanley argue?" was asked, but was
Withdrawn on an objection that it con-
Pains attorney.
WAS w. l.. Stanley attorney for the
Hawaiian TTamways company"
He acted for Paul Neuman in the
matter"
'Who did Mr.. Neumann act for?"
ION his own account. He had moth
ing to do with-the matter, or ought
not to have had"
Pain declared that he had had no
case which went against the company
he represented, and that he protested
to Neumann against it. 1t appeared
that there had been a lively interview
between the defendant and Pain and
Neumann in San Francisco, after the
submission of agreed facts to the Su-
preme court had been agreed upon.
"Neumann made the agreement to go
to the Supreme Court and engaged
Judge Stanley as counsel" said Pain.
81 met him in San Francisco before the
case came up, and made strong pro-
test. I asked him what he wanted to
put up a thing like that for when the
policy had been to fight every case of
the kind, on every point, to the very
last. He said it was no use talking like
that now that the thing was done, and
that we must go ahead"
1t appeared from the records that
after Pains return and after he had
made a protest to Stanley, further facts
were submitted to the court, but Pain
denied that he had had anything to do
with it, "Neumann did it ALL said
Pain several times, claiming that the
late attorney had had no authority to
do so.
George f. Smithies, former cashier of
the Interior Office, testified to Neu-
mann's having filed certified copies
of the articles of association, but he
was not able to say that they were
certified beyond the fact that they
were so marked.
The affidavit of Treasurer Wright
followed. 1t declared that his former
affidavit, i'm which he had made refer
ence to a certified copy of the articles
of association and bylaws of the Ha-
waiian Tramways company was wrong.
BY an inadvertence the word "certi-
fed" had been used. The copy filed
was not certified and there was no
certified copy at all on file with the
department
CHAMBERLAIN'S COUGH REMEDY
IN CHICAGO.