The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1902-09-22
FIRE CLAIMS
(ConIInuod from PAGE oncJ


mad owned goods and his story AS to
prices. In this particular claim no 9TH
err witness had been called.
Claim No. 20 was then called. This
was japanese, Nurashigi Yoshisuke
being assignee. The amount claimed
was $2il.45, the award $l25.70. No 9TH
er witnesses We're called in this case.
The point was brought out that Chi
nese and Japanese claims had all been
submitted, prior To- examination by the
Commission, to committees of the Chi
nese and Japanese consulates.
No. 30 was called next. Copies of the
claims chosen were asked for altogeth-
er with copy of all evidence taken by
the stenographer No. 30 proved to be
that of S. O2aki, assignee of Shigenui.
Mr. Macfarane explained that through
the Japanese consulate committee, Mr..
Ozaki was assignee for many.
The claim of the Japanese Methodist
Episcopal Church for s3O97.70 claim No.
l. was next taken in which the award
was fixed at $263l.65. The claim includ-
ed church, parsonage. fence outbuild-
lngs, personal property and fixtures of
the buildings. Ten per cent had been
deducted from the cost of the church
owing to age. The testimony was read.
j. j. Dunno and Frank Andrade an
pearing for the government Witness
es were G. b. Ripley of the appraisers
board, the Rev. G. l.. Pearson, trustee,
Syorumori, Irkugubu, KawasaKi and
the Rev. G. Kehara. The witnesses
were known to the Commission as men
of good standing.
Claim No. 1, that of Shimamoto. fof
SS935.26, filed at $1O,923S4, the footings
having proved incorrect on auditing.
This was mercantile claim. The lee
ord was exhibited by Clerk Riggs. The
! award was $4S26.05, less than fifty per
cent. The claim had several hearings.
taking up altogether two weeks time
before the Commission. f. NJ. Brooks
and Kinney, Ballou d McClanahan
acted for the claimants, Peters, An
drews g. Andrade for the government.
Well known witnesses had been called
including customs inspector, $. Oza-
XII, Edward Towse and II. E. Cooper
and all rigidly cross-examined. There
had been much salvage connected with
this case.
Claim No. II of zee Wo Chan & Co
for s71,1O3.7S showed an award of $23,
555.75 Certified custom house COPIES
and many witnesses. Prices of mer-.
chandise, item by item, were scrutiniz-
ed, the age of the goods always being
closely looked into, the idea being to
arrive at the probable results of a sale.
Much merchandise was counter worn
and rusted. No positive evidence was
forthcoming as to the actual existence
OF the goods in the store. Paul Neu-
mann was the attorney. Senator Fos-
ter asked as to his fee, but could not
answers $4,000 was insurance includ-
ed in the $7IO0O but was deducted by
the Commission.
into the claims having stated that the
Commission was very anxious to be
able to answer all opposition and ques-
tons that might arise when the ques-
ton came before the general govern
ment. The buildings, not being con-
demned, had not been appraised, the
nre having been an accidental one of
January goth. Underwater Gurrey was
called in this case with Appraiser Rip
ley and c. w. Dickey, architect.
Senator Burton came into the session
shortly after eleven. Judge Whiting,
as successor to Paul Neumann, was
sworn and raised the question of insur-
ance. Senator Burton asked why the
insurance was deducted and Commits
sioner Macfarlane explained that it
was because the insurance had been
PAID. The insurance claims were argu-
ed by the Attorney General and claim
ants counsels, but it was held that I'M
der the act, the insurance companies
were not reimbursed
Senator Burton asked from what
point of equity were individual claims
allowed and not insurance companies.
Was it because the insurance COM
panies were rich?'
From the standpoint of the natural
risk of fire insurance" explained Mr.
Mactarlane. accepting premiums as
consideration"
But not against wanton or wilful
ilres started by municipalities? said
Senator Burton.
1t was explained that in some forms
of certain companies, acts of civil au-
thorities were accepted, in others eX-
septed. In the latter cases no claim
mad been made. The equity side had
not been taken up by Commission at
all, as beyond their jurisdiction.
Judge Whiting claimed that the $12.-
600 had been segregated twice. Mr..
Macfarlane claimed that when claim
ant segregated part of the claim to
an insurance company, ii was beyond
the commission and up to the insur-
ance company and the claimant" The
Commission found the loss entire to be |
$4,000 and deducted $4,000 as having |
been paid. The insurance lien came off |
the remainder. 1t was the point for |
the insurance company to recover from
the claimant If the insurance money |
had been wrongfully paid.
Claim 434 of Lahapa Mauliawa filed |
at $29,SO2.50 was corrected to $31 ,0O7. 80 |
on footing. This was personal effect
claim, one of the largest and the award
was 50, 5000. Several witnesses were
called. Claim 403 of Joseph p. Men
ionca, Portuguese, for $21 92O.75 was
next taken. The claim was for build
ngs and S3,S56.5O was awarded. The
claimant in this case had bought some
IF the property since the fire and 9TH
'r claims We're in for the disallowed
Sometimes" explained Commission
he same building under various leases,
hacfarlane, six claimants came up for
'ut except where leases specified own
'rship of buildings, the Commission
lid not recognize such claimants.
'laims were made on leases unrecord-
ID, the document being destroyed in
he fire.
4 | 4