Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1902-01-10
COURT AND COUNSEL
ALSO INTERPRETER
HAVE WARM TIMES

man replied, ut was not our judg.
ment," and was allowed to proceed.
Interpreter Called Down.
BY and by lease was presented for
identification by the witness and as he
bent over it he asked the Interpreter
who held II a question. That official
I replied in Chinese, then said in En-
glish, ut is a lease" Mr.. Dunno OBJ
jected to the making of testimony by
the interpreter, whereupon the latter
was addressed thus sternly by the
court.
"Mr. Interpreter, you just interpret
and then stop. If not, you had better
keep ont of this court"
"He asked me what Il was" meekly
explained the interpreter.
THAT makes no difference" reioin.
ed the court. -
Exhibit Makes Trouble.
Another breezy episode followed fast
A cheque fsf $1,000 from w. G. Irwin
to pay Wing Now Wal Co. for It's
leasehold OF 25 or 30 acres was sub
mitted for Identification as an exhibit
to be filed. Mr.. Dunno objected to the
admission Of the paper, the court favor
ing the objection, on the grounds that
the cheque was made In 1900 and the
| transaction had nothing to do with
this case. The Government attorney
cited Massachusetts decision that one
year was too long a time elapsed before
the price of property could be given
as evidence Of present value. Author
tiles differed as to whether the price
of contiguous land could be offered as
, evidence Of the value of the land in
volyed, but those holding the affirma-
tive maintained that one year was too
long.
Strong Words Used.
Judge Estee remarked-it having
been made clear that the object of the
mooted exhibit was to prove the value
OF the land for rice cultivation-that
the jury had gore over the land and
knew whether II was rice land or not,
and whether or not II was cultivated.
Then he ruled out the cheque becausa
w. q. Twins name had not hitherto
appeared In the proceedings. The court
and everybody connected with II, lie
went on to say, saw that the land was
on the edge OF blum and that not
more than an acre of II could be culti-
waited In rice. In the face OF such
knowledge, the evidence offered was a
trampling up public justice which
would not be permitted in that court.
Mr.. Silliman objected to the state
ment of the court.
The court said the company engin-
eer and other witnesses had testified
that all the water on that land was
| from the artesian well.
Mr.. Silliman, in answer to the au-
thorities cited against the exhibit
pointed out that the cheQue was dated
in December, 1900, which was only
| about six months prior to the begin
ming OF this action. II was therefore
well inside OF the time limit quoted
by the Federal attorney.
Mr.. Dunno, seeing the court was dis
posed to entertain opposite counsels
reasoning, renewed his objection.
Mr.. Silliman explained that he want
ed to show the nature OF the trans
action.
Chinese Testimony Impugned.
Judge Estee exclaimed well,
bring in another witness, for the court
and the jury saw this land, and the
evidence of this witness is a trampling
on public justice. Bring in a white
witness He then refused to allow
a question asking to whom the cheque
was paid, saying II might as well be
! understood, first as last. that the court
would not accept Chinese testimony
that was contrary to facts known to
ths court.
Mr.. Silliman, with an objection noted
to the ruling Of the court, withdrew
the witness.
Manager Low Knows.
James A. Low, manager of the Ho-
nolulu Plantation Company, was re-