The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1902-01-25
HONOLULU PLANTATION WAS
AWARDED TOO MUCH.
Estee Offers to Approve Verdict UP to
$4,000, or order the Case Tried over
Again.

the case OF the united states against
the Honolulu Plantation Company. He
declared that the award of S105,00 was
excessive, and granted the motion for a
new trial unless reduced by at least 800
600. If the defendants are willing to de-
duct this sum and accept 5000 the
court will approve the verdict and the
payment win be made. Otherwise a new
trial is ordered. The decision was in
part as follows;
1T is presumed the jury intended to
be controlled in fixing the value Of the
leasehold interest in the lands by a pre-
ponderance of the evidence, but i'm the
judgment of the Court they failed to do
this.
81 will review a few of the estimates
placed upon this leasehold interest Mr..
Archer the Assessor Of the Territory,
and apparently a disinterested witness,
placed a valuation of S25 per acre on the
leasehold interest in this land. Mr..
Herbert, to all intents an unwilling wit
ness for the plaintiff, placed a valuation
of from SIS to 500 per acre on the 34s
acres shown by the evidence to have
been cleared, and S25 per acre on the
remaining 2l9 acres making an average
of from $54 to 81 per acre on the whole
561.2 acres.
THE testimony of Mr.. Low, the man
ager of the defendant, and who repres-
ented the defendant throughout the
trial, is glaringly and curiously incon-
sistent. He gave five dif0arent es-
Inmates as to the value of this leasehold
four Of them widely varying. In his
sworn answer filed herein, he alleges
that the defendant would be damaged
by the taking of this land in the sum
of $4,000 less $55055 for alleged i'm
provements on said land, placing the
valuation Of the leasehold in the lands
alone at $144945.
tba tviol tho so mo yt-if,,acc taetf
fed that the whole interest Of the de-
fendant in the leasehold in these lands
was worth 100000.
He further testified that the valua-
tion of the land was $500 per acre with
out the incumbrance Of the leases but
with the leases it would be worth 1882
per acre, or about what the average of
the estimates of Archer and Herbert
would be in this case.
1t further appears that in accordance
with the laws Of the Territory of Ha-
wall, Mr.. Low, acting as the Manager
of the defendant made a return to the
Assessor for the year 1900 in which he
swore to the value of the leasehold in
terests of the defendant in 4720 acres of
land, including the 561.2 in controversy,
at $4,000 making an average value of
about Sl5 per acre; while for the yea2
1901, he returned the same leasehold in
terests covering a trihe more acreage
amount to 4774 acres, and including the
same 561.2 acres in controversy, at $780,
600 or an average of S17 per acre.
THE evidence showed that a portion
of these leased lands other than the
56l2 acres is now and for two years
last past has been cultivated to cane
and apparently are quite as valuable
as the land in controversy
1T is further in evidence that these
tax returns are required by law to be
fn hyr ATY j
enting the defendant and it it further
required by said law that these returns
shall represent tn actual cash value OF
the property. 1t is presumed that the
defendant through its Manager, Mr..
Low was swearing to the truth when
these returns were made, and If so, how
is this testimony on the trial to be re-
conciled Herewith?
THE compensation for this leasehold
must be just and it must be admitted
that defendant should not have a judg-
ment for more than its property is
worth, and the value of the property to
be taken must be fixed by the rational
and usual means. This value should
/ have been obtained by the jury from a
fair and reasonable analysis of all the
evidence given by the witnesses on the
trial
so the Court is largely controlled in
| deciding this motion by the admitted
sworn statements of Mr. Low, as to the
value of this leasehOld interest in this
land at a time when there was no rea-
son to initiate its value. Low must have
known more of the value of this lease
hold than any other witness called by
defendant or by plaintiff and courts
viii not permit interesting parties tC
blow hot or cold according to their de-
veloped interest in a case at bar.
And again; it is not denied that
na
mencement of this case, the Dowsett
lease which had then ten years to rur
was purchased outright by the defend.
ant, including all rents fully paid up
for the sum of $4,000. This lease ther
and now covering, inclusive Of the 561 /.
acres in controversy, some 290O acres
| of land, of which the defendant is now
in possession under said lease and mucf
of which is being cultivated.
There is no testimony that this LAND
has ever produced any income, and thai
While 342 acres of the 561.2 has beer
cleared, 1t has never been cultivated t.
cane nor has any crop ever been pro.
duced upon it, And yhile it may be
! possible to raise cane on this land on
| part of IL with plenty of water yet Il
| is shallow and much Of IL is adobe.
The testimony of the eight witnesses
/ called for defendant as experts, as tC
I the value Of the leasehold interest va.
| RED in amount from S400 900 to $239 4Ol
| In the mind of the Court, these esuma.
| tes We're eXaggerations and were great
| ly in excess of any value shown to D.,
| possessed by this leasehold interest b,
/ the party chiefly I'm interest, the de.
/ fendant through it's Manager Mr.. Low
! They We're mainly Jumping estimates o.
| the value of the property and apparent
! ly purely speculative, based upon wha
/ this land might possibly produce unde
! given conditions not shown 90 exist
| and from a carful examination of th
| testimony of at least four of these wit
| nesses (Mr. Ahrens, Mr.. GoOdale, Mr.
! RentOn and Mr.. Meyers, all OF whom
were plantation Managers) IL win bl
seen that in each instance a value IL
fixed upon this leasehold interest O.
56l.2 acres far i'm excess Of the amour
of the valuation approximately place.
upon the lands of the plantations II
| which they were each Managers and Il
some of them largely interested. Thes
Continued to page eighty