The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1902-06-24

ent that he objected to defendants oc-
cupation of King street, nor had plain
tiff given notification OF further legal
proceedings. Relying upon the decision
OF the Supreme Court and the United
States Court. respondent has made
large expenditures OF money. and
though plaintiff knew this he had re
FUSED, neglected and failed to prosecute
or avail himself~of/a legal right
which il might have had from the said
26th day OF April, 1901. to the 9th day
of November 1901" 1t is also set out
that plaintiff admitted and recognized
the validity OF the corporate existence
OF respondent in the submission TO the
Supreme Court. and IL Is urged that by
the decision OF the United States Court
the questions raised in this suit have
already been adjudicated. and the petit
toner is now estopped from again
bringing up these matters. The fact or
the appeal now pending in the Circuit
Court OF Appeals is also set out as an
estoppel OF the new suit
Concluding. the respondent says:
"As n further showing of cause this
respondent AYERS that IL is abundantly
able To respond in damages TO any tenn
porary obstruction or interference with
rhe operation on said King street OF
said car line OF said petitioner. which
may be caused through the construction
OF this respondents said street car line.
and that the issuance OF a temporary
injunction In this cause. IL this Honor
able Court is vested with jurisdiction in
the premises would work to your re-
spondent a loss and injury far in eX-
cess OF any possible loss or injury
which might or could result to petition
ct through a refusal so to Issue said in
junction.
That respondent Is advised by those
learned in the law and upon such adj
vice alleges. that the said petitioner.
having heretofore as herein set forth
submitted itself to the jurisdiction OF
the said Supreme Court of the Territory
of Hawaii and having in said submis-
sion submitted for adjudication the
right of this respondent to lay its
railway track on said King street. and
the said Supreme Court of the Territory
OF Hawaii having decided said question
favorably to this respondent. and the
said Supreme Court being then and
there a court of competent jurisdiction
and the said decision therein being final
and decisive between the parties there
10, the said petitioner is estopped from
further questioning the right OF this re-
spoDdent to lay it's railway tracks on
said King street.
And this respondent is further adj
vised by those learned in law, and
upon such advice alleges, that the said
petitioner. having heretofore on the 9th
day OF November. A ID. 1901, filed it's
complaint in this Honorable Court set
ting up n cause OF action which had
Deen adjudicated in the submission TO
BILE Court having passed upon said
question and dismissed the bill of said
Hawaiian Tramways Company. Ltd,
and rendered its decision. and being
then and there court OF competent
Jurisdiction and the said decision there
in being final and decisive between the
parties hereto. the said petitioner Is
estopped from raising said question in
the suit herein at this time brought.
And your respondent further alleges
shows M he
going matters and things herein set
forth. and by reason OF the question OF
the right OF this respondent to the use
OF King street for more than 100 feet
having heretofore been adjudicated and
fully passed upon. IL now does not in
this suit lie within the right or the
province of said petitioner to question
collateraily the charter OF this respond
ent or it's right legally TO act and carry
On its business within the Territory OF .
Hawaii.
As "A further and final showing of
cause why the temporary Injunction Z
prayed for should not issue. this re- |
spondent alleges and shows unto this :
Honorable Court that the construction .
OF said railway on said King street !
OF by said petitioner in its
said complaint is at this time fully I'm I
ished and completed and ready for the
running of cars thereon. and cars are
now being regularly operated thereon. .
Wherefore. for and by reason OF the .
several showings OF cause hereinbefore l
set out this respondent submits that /
cause has been shown in response To-
the order Of this Honorable Court; that
this Court has no Jurisdiction in the
premises: that said temporary injunc-
ton should not issue. and that petition
RS bill be dismissed with costs
RAPID TRANSIT AND
LAND COMPANY.
BY it's President. l.. A Thurston.