The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1903-08-15
a GUARDIAN
Is NEEDED
JUDGE GEAR APPOINTS ANOTHER GUARDIAN OF THE
CAMPBELL MINORS AND INSISTS THAT THE ACTIONS
AND CONVENTIONS OF THE TRUSTEES ARE OPPOS-
ED TO THE MINORS INTERESTS. .1aasAsGAa@

Judge morning appointed Dunno guardian Murie
and Mary Campbell minors to succeed George Davis and filed
which he gave for the appointment of guar
says request
the executors and that ne reported against having any guardian but
that the decided the other and appointed him guardian
Gear again holds that the actions the adverse to the
teres OF the minors far as the property California is concerned
and therefore he appoints guardian again he decision after review
ling authorities show that the Campbell will void in California and
the therefore entitled of the California
property in fee simple at says
THE thereafter made order appointing George Davis
ESQ., guardian of the property Of these minors for the OF
ectng their the San Jose property the Court having
cong then understanding the belief that the appointment
satisfactory to the mother the MINORS an understanding Whch mas
however been dspeed by the subsequent action the mother
These proceedings taken believe in the best of faith Mr.
tesyng that the acted when they did the
San property the of carrying the intention
illegal opposed the interest of the minors and other
children James Campbell is that the will void i'll
while brought under the will the fee will go to some heir pres
unknown the children getting only share OF the income While
undoubtedly advised by Mr. Bird that the
ceeg had proper both Mr. Brown and Mr. Carter admit that
will California If the and
however understands their contention that the
proceedings San legal and proper and that the property can
legally be made subject the the will follows that their
enton dametray opposed the of the children the
Courts conclusion and the will be void in California for in
get the fee of the and the
their of income 1t question Of law
the consideration of which the trustees contention adverse
that the rights the children this Court concludes them to do
The question then arises whether this Court having
cuded be convenient and necessary appoint guardian the
of these children should be governed its selection and a
ponment guardian by the wishes request OF the mother who
the execux and the the executors and remain
"Whe the Court inclined, does wish make ap
opinion that the would only be
proper allow the nominate guardian but that
contrary would be improper and the wesetted
rules of law to do
This being the law apparent this Court that it would be
allow who incompetent be the guardian die
whom the Court should appoint 1t is the Courts duty appoint
such person the Court believes will faithfully and conscenous
perform his duties while the Court hopes its appontee will be
sacory the trustees, will allow them to dictate the
appointment
Undr the law of this Territory the Judge OF Probate when
shall him convenient appoint guardians for
minors and others.
he while having the highest regard for the honesty and in
the and trustees named nevertheless differs from
them the rights of the in this and therefore, for the
purpose OF tgatng these necessary well taking
OF the interests of the minors will appoint another guardian for
them.
n this connection not be of place that when the
filed their Mr. Cecil Brown asked
behalf OF the appoint Mr. Davis and his
quest and nomination the appointment made Mr. Davis his
recommended that guardian should be appointed but the
Court agreed with the guardian ad Item and made the appointment
appointing the the had
and believing at the time that the appointment would be equally
ceptab the asked for before 1t will be
Mr. Davis originally the
the executors and the suggestion of the Court"