The Hawaiian gazette., 1902-05-06

ti'tnNNE Cofnf CNihuiiNA.
gtt tuHfltIt raufi has uttffuitd the
tsfafflaHe III SOC t4sa nt thf fsf4infY
~ Az NnNa. flfflHi from tht fNlflh
t.ui count a. fht supreme rUuH bF
10 defendant Defendant wAf prose
tuiNi fUf fufHlshlnF poisonous dfnr.
g. ut Opium without o. LICENSE. TIE
prosecution frsi moved 20 strike the
tlu nf exceptions FROM the record IN
thp uruuHd that notice ~ ta pfesenta-
tiun in the Circuit Court had not be N
tittu Rs required ny Circuit Cuur; rule
is,
The prosecution next contondcd that
there was nothing before the court un-
dsr the bill - except q . The supreme
court states that the evidence w not
nude part ~ the bill by reference or
otherwise. and indeed although trans
,riIt ~ evidence appears among the
papers cent M. IL was not even Med
In the court below,
DENIES RIGHT TO STE.
TIE Waikiki Land and Loan Associ-
alton. one of the defendants In the suit
81 sun kwong Mau co. against the
Rapid Transit Co. et al. filed its an
aver to the plaintiffs complaint. De
PENDANT admits that on December 81,
1855. one l.. McCully was the owner and
seized In fee and possessed of n certain
tract of land containing 1890 acres. at
WAIKIKI, and on the date mentioned
NcCully let said tract to Min Fong Wal
60. for the term Of 80 years. The de-
PENDANT. however. says IL has no knowl-
edge that the Min Fong Wal Co. was
u partnership formed, created and
organized pursuant to the laws OF the
Territory and denies the truth OF other
matters mentioned i'm the complaint,
wherein II is alleged that included in
the 1870 acres was the tract of 15
acres mentioned in the complaint as be-
ing possessed by the plaintiff.
The defendant sets forth that II is
the owner in fee simple of all OF the
premises described. free and clear OF
all sub-leases and other membranes,
under and by virtue OF and through
a conveyance from Ellen McCully Hig-
gins and j. II. Higgins. her husband,
dated February IL, 1900, to Geo. ii.
Paris, Mrs. Higgins at that time being
the owner of the tract In fee simple.
The tract was subsequently conveyed
by Paris to the Waikiki Land a. Loan
Association. by deed. dated July 10.
1900, and therefore the Waikiki Land a.
Loan Association has succeeded to the
title of said Min Fong Wal Co. The
defendant alleges that the plaintiffs
nave no right title or interest in or
to any portion of the land named or
described in the amended bill of com
plant. The defendant further alleges
bill of complaint are not the persons
entitled to bring suit.
Relying upon title to the premises.
the defendant made contract with one
James S. Mckee. one of the defendants,
to construct a road across the tract
and Mckee entered upon portion of
| tho premises and constructed the
foundation therefor The defendant
prays that the amended bill be dismiss
ed and that the temporary injunction
| be dissolved.
| James Mckee, in his answer, sets
! forth practically what il alleged in the
answer of the Waikiki Land d Loan
Association.
| PLAINTIFFS GUILTY OF LACHES.
J Albert Horner defendant in an action
brought against him by one Makaio.
| bill to ioreclose mortgage. was vic
| torious in the suit. Judge Robinson yes
terday deciding the case in his favor.
; The judge ordered that judgment be
entered for defendant and that plain
tiff take nothing by the action. but that
defendant Horner have and recover
judgment against the plaintiff for his
! costs. In this case the plaintiff offered
evidence tending to prove his case and
in the absence Of any defense the evil
dence offered was in all respects suffi-
cient to prove all of the material allie
cations of his bill. Judge Robinson at
'lrms that there was no testimony ad-
! duced in the presentation of the plain
tffs case tending to establish the the
DRY advanced by the defendant, Hor-
ner, in his amendment to his answer.
! that the plaintiff was estopped from
foreclosing the lien of his mortgage or
that he had waived the lien of the
| mortgage as to the defendant, Horner,
| because of his connection as agent or
broker for the mortgagor in the sale OF
ln N rtfpnu ya1 nfgnS To 1nfn do inf
Horner. The only questions to deter
mine were whether the plaintiff had
been guilty of laches. in failing to en-
force his lien for period of over four
teen years, and whether or not plain
tiffs right of action is barred by the
statute of limitations. In his opinion.
Judge Robinson said that both queS-
tions presented should be answered in
| the affirmative.
COURT NOTES.
c. W. Ashford appeared on record
yesterday as an attorney, after several
years absence, as counsel for defend
ants in the case of F. Wundenberg
trustee, VS.. George Markham and G. II
Cummings, now pending in the Circuit
Court. Defendant, George Markham
demurs to the plaintiffs declaration in
which he alleges he is entitled to the
peaceful possession of premises at Ka-
lihi, set forth In deed of trust. De-
PENDANT states it does not appear by
whom or by virtue Of what authority
the plaintiff was appointed as such
trustee.
discontinuance has been filed ir
the case of l.. l.. McCandless vs.. Sam
uel Andrews.
Appeal has been filed by defendant.
from judgment of the District Magis
| trate of Honolulu in the cases of tn,
Territory VS.. Yake (Japanese) and Ter
ritory VS.. Wing Sing.
George Lucas, clerk of the Court, ha.
attached an affidavit to the bill for in
junction In the case of John Kidwel
vs.. Frank Godfrey, stating that tn,
cause was remanded to the Circui
Court by order filed April /, 1902, anc
that defendant has filed no answer OF
: other paper in the case. The plaintiff