The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-01-10
OPINION OF THE COURT BY GALBRAITH, J.

The nrncip facts of this follows: On the 4th
dav of May 1897 the defendants indebted to Paul lsn
berg and J. F. Hacfed partners H. Hacked Company
for advances made in the sum of 10000 In consideration of
this Indebtedness the agreement of Hackfed Co. to make
further advances needed during the period of ten years next
ensuing from said date exceeding the OF
s34 400 CO. the defendants executed their coffee
estate of located Oaa District of Puma Island OF
Hawaii It was provided that the mortgage should be connu
inc security advances made during SAID ten years IN any
sum not exceed $780, 10000 This mortgage was afterwar
ASSIGNED TO the present owner Hackfed Co., Limited The
mortgage contained ala the following covenant e.,
the said moreagors Themselves their heirs and assigns
hereby agree and with the said mortgages their
heirs and assigns they will keep the cultivation OF coffee
now or hereafter growing upon said land the satisfaction OF
the said mortgages heirs, executors, OF
assigns etc. provided that f breach be made IN
the performance observance of OF the covenants or
., 1oro;, contained then said Indebtedness shall
at once become wholly due and payable ETC. Advances were
the mortgage from its date until March ls l9oi "
which time the Indebtedness secured y the mortgage aouteo
in the aggregate to $20,OS4.7S.
On s the assignee of the mortgages refused 10
make anv further advances the mortgage and by reso
ton of of directors declared that 1t was not sase
with the cultivation of coffee by the defendants and rated e
action of its president Paul IenbeIg, n proceeding to lore
close said mortgage by of the breach of the covenant 70
the cultivation OF the coffee growing upon iu ~ ~
the satisfaction of the moragee and also for breach OF the COW
enans contained in agreement referred to IN sad mortgage
relating to the keeping proper books of account and to the
purchase of supplies from Hackfeld & Co. and IL tackled
& Co., Limited
On March 18th 1901 the plaintiff filed its bin to forecoe
the mortgage alleging breach of the conditions above set QUIZ
failure 10 cultivate the coffee to its satisfaction to keep
books of account purchase goods of the MORTGAGE
and pravng that mortgage be orecod and that the o
its
costs and charges of the proceedings The defendants
denvino the breach of the and alleged that the pam
tiff was not bona de and good faith dissatisfied with their c
tvation of the coffee its dissatisfaction was with tne
venture as whole and with coffee culture as Pro'aoe
men At the trial the plaintiffs abandoned ell OF the
breaches of covenant except that in relation to the "
coffee
The trial Judge found for defendants and entered decree
Diminishing the bill plaintiff appeals from that decree 10 '
court.
Tho onelant contends the law of the case Is seed III
this jurisdiction as announced by this Court III ho0f T. sup
Works Q Haw 262 and Porter T. Haca"a" foh f"'A"9
Companv II Haw 46S; that under the law TINS covenant P
with the mortgages their assigns, the op!ioh 10 ~
bb f tho covenant whenever became dissatisfied with the
cultivation of coffee and that whenever TINS option was
o w d NV the resolution offered in evidence, the act was
conclusive and inquiry its purpose was
That under the there evidence that would sustain the
finding of the Judge in favor of the defendants
This contention is sound in part The law con
sder with care and learning the two eases cited but It's
proper application 10 the bar not free from
difficulty The Rawlins of employment The
action was by the employee against the employer recover dam
ages under the contract stipulated that the work
should be done skul and proper manner and ito the
satisfaction of the employer held that these two COY