The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1903-07-17
BEAUI|F III
|AO VALLEY
The Argument Is
On In Water
Contest.


a mental excursion into the beautiful
lao Valley, Maui, before Judge De
Bolt yesterday afternoon. This was
in his opening of the argument for
plaintiff in the water rights injunction
suit of Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar
Co. against Waikiki Sugar Co. w. o.
Smith was present and announced by
Mr.. Hartwell as associate counsel for
plaintiff. w. A. Kinney appeared for
defendant.
" do you desire to put on any addi-
tional evidence. gentlemen" the court
asked.
Here are 800 pages" Mr.. Smith an
swered, tapping a pile of taped bum
dies of legal cap paper.
There were sheaves of memoranda,
including unbound sheets of Vol. IA
Hawaiian REPORTS, under Judge Hart
wells hands. while on the clerks ia
BILE maps and deeds and Commissioner
j. F. Browns formidable report just
filed We're heaped.
Judge Hartwell. in his opening, laid
great stress upon the Importance Of
the courts having a clear vision of
the topography Of the Wailuku rivers
watershed. And he described that
beauteous landscape with a dizziness
of word painting which would not
have .discredited Bayard Taylor or
even Washington Irving. The task
was lightened to some extent by Judge
De Bolts saying, in answer to ques-
ton. that he had been privileged, in
propria persona, to have visited Wal
luku.
One of the first things to argue for
the plaintiff was that the controversy
was not res adjudicata, or settled pre-
viously to a finality in the courts.
These points were urged as having
been settled:
That surplus water was that which
was in excess of water used by those
having prescriptive rights thereto and
which If not utilized by others would
run to waste.
That former decisions related to sur
plus water and did not affect the pres
ent contention that the Wailuku Su-
gar Co., was using water to which it
did not, but to which the Hawaiian
Commercial G. Sugar Co., Ltd, did.
have prescriptive rights.
That while both parties owned lands
having from early times prescriptive
rights to water from Wailuku river,
the Wailuku Sugar Co. was diverting
such water to land a mile away which
never had prescriptive rights thereto.
That certain rights the Wailuku Su-
gar Co., claimed now had been obtain
ed since the beginning of the cause of
the present action. This referred to
the Waikapu purchase.
1t was related by Judge Hartwell
that the suit of Claus Spreckels
against the Hawaiian Commercial &
Sugar Co., on his claim of personal
ownership of water rights vested in
certain land, had been compromised
after Baldwin and Castle obtained the
control of the II. C. & S. Co.
Judge Hartwell will conclude his
address this mf ming, to be followed
by IN. Kinney for the defendant.
Commissioner Brown yesterday filed
his account or services, charging ST.
04O or 500 a day for 102 days on his
ow. account and sssa9o expenses.
,pUTH STREET INJUNCTION.
Henry Z. Cooper, Superintendent Of
Public Works, and Charles b. Wilson,
Road Supervisor, have fiicu an answer
to the amended complaint of Kapiolani
Estate, Ltd, for 'njun ltion on South
street Improvement operations.
They allege that all the land in ques-
ton is and has been from time i'm
memorial owned by the Territory of
Hawaii and its predecessors, in fee
simple, as Government land, and de-
PENDANTS further allege that said Gov
eminent of the Territory of Hawaii is
entitled to the exclusive use and pos
session of said premises.
They deny that they or either of
them. together with a large force of
men by them employed or working I'M
der their order or authority. are now
engaged. or ever were engaged in an
unlawful attempt to take possession
of the premises In question on South
street.
Defendant Wilson admits that he
took possession of the premises in his
official capacity. for the purpose of
constructing and macadamizing the
westerly line of said South street.
Defendants say they at no time
broke, or removed. or caused to be
broken or removed any valuable fences