Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1902-01-11

Continued from page ID
! Government for pubic use may receive
therefor iull ana just compensation.
In this behalf | charge you that the
| leasChold interest of the defendant,
the Honolulu Plantation Company, Is
property and that the said defendant
is entitled to receive lust compen.
sation" Tor its taking.
And in assessing this lust compen.
satiOn" 1t is your duty &c see that II
rs just, not merely 10 the individual
whose property is taken, but to the
public who is to pay for it," (Searl
VS.. School District, 1873 U. 5. 562J.
Fair to Both Sides.
In this behalf further charge you
that 1t is your duty to treat botn sides
with equal fairness and Importantly
in arriving at a conclusion on the
question OF compensation. You arc
not to give to one side any preferment
or advantage denied the other. For
instance, you are not to place an un.
duly deprecated valuation upon this
leasehold interest because the United
! States Government wants II. nor
should you place an exaggerated valu.
| HN'Nh NpOh NhN PioptlNs btNaubt
II Is private property or because the
| Government wants 1t.
You are to proceed and act through.
out with fairness and impartiality,
treating both sides alike and deciding
disputed questions solely upon the ev.
idence, received WITHIN the lines laid
down by this charge, and you are to
be the sole judges of the weight of the
nVinanRn introduced hnratn
Court Not Biased.
II, in the course OF this long and te.
dious trial, the Court mas by any word
or expression appeared TO favor ons
side or the other in this suit, be un.
deceived. The Court does not take
sides in this matter. II is the duty of
the Court, and its aim, ana 1t should
be the duty Of the Jury, to do abso.
lutte justice between the parties in this
as in all other actions; and you are
simply to take the law from the Court
and contine yourselves solely to a con.
sideration OF the testimony produced
in the case III arriving at a verdict,
without limiting your consideration to
any Isolated portions OF the testimony,
but considering IL as a whole, weigh.
ing both the direct and indirect evi.
dence with all reasonable differences
to be drawn therefrom.
| instruct you that whenever pri.
vate property is taken for public use.
or for public purposes. the fair market
value OF the property at the time of
the taking should be paid for II: and
according to the statute OF this Terri.
tory the actual value of the property
at the date OF the summons is desig.
mated as the measure OF the valuation
of all property to be condemned; and
! charge you that the date Of the sum.
mons in this case Is July 9Th, 1901.
II is to this date. therefore, that you
are to look in fixing the value of the
leasehold interest involved IN this
case. You are to remember that the
material consideration is the actual
condition of the leasehold interest on
that date. 1t is to this that you are
limited.
Placing leasehold Value.
In placing a valuation upon this
leasehold interest you cannot consider
the mere speculative or possible value
OF sugar that might be produced on
this land ten, twenty or thirty years
from now. This is too remote and I'M
| certain, and coulu form no just basis
for q valuation. So the amount OF su.
gar which 1t is claimed can be produc
ed on this land Is purely speculative;
the amount of the future crop would
depend on many conditions, the
amount of water used, the character
OF the cultivation and many other ele
ments which must enter into the prob
lem of crop which might be produc
ed In any one or series of years. But
you may consider what the land is best
suited for, and the defendant is en-,
titled to Just compensation" for its
leasehold interest in these lands for
any purpose for which II may be used.
You may In estimating the value of
this piece Of land sought by the Gov.
eminent for public purposes, consider
any usefulness it may possess to the
Honolulu Plantation Company in view
OF Its whole property, its needs and
its equipment,
And If from the evidence you should
find that the defendant has any i'm.
proyements upon that portion of the
land covered by the leasehold interest
OF the defendant, and sought to be con.
demned by the United States, which
were there prior to the 9th day of
July, 1901, you are to find the value
thereof separate and distinct from the
value OF the leasehold itself in said
lands.
Mill Is Ruled Out.
And in this regard | instruct you
that you cannot consider In this case
the cost or value of the sugar mill,
the pumping station or other machln,
cry belonging to the defendant, II not
constructed or standing upon the land
aOuPht IN he pondamnad nv tho ITnitad