The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-06-25
H|LO JURY
STILL OUT.
No Agreement At a
Late Hour LAST
Night.

Hilo waterfront case shortly AFTER
p. m. yesterday.
! J. A. Magoon moved for directed
verdict for the plaintiff, c. A. Brown.
on the grounds that he had proved a
clear title to the property and that the
defendants had failed to prove any title.
The motion was denied.
S. NJ. Ballou for the defendants }. ID.
Spreckels and others, moved for di-
| rected verdict for the defendants on
the same grounds as those presented
to support the motion for a non-su1t.
The motion was denied.
Mr.. Magoon next moved that the
question of adverse possession be with
drawn from the jury.
Judge Gear asked if he wanted addt-
tional instructions, adding, Il will in
struct the jury at the end of the case
The motion was withdrawn.
w. A. Kinney began addressing the
/ jury for the defendants at 2:2S and
spoke for fifty minutes. At the outset
he admitted that Brown was entitled
to whatever was given him in the deed
from Mrs. Pitnan. His title rested on
the Bates grant from Kamehameha III,
| which, after description of three sides,
stated, and also the sea beach in front
of the same to low water mark" Did
that mean all of the territory between
! high and low water mark now, or the
sea beach as it existed in 1858?
Defendants contended that all of the
accretions in evidence went to the Ha-
waiian Government under a ruling of
the court Mr. Magoon had said that
everybody used that beach, and it had
turned out that he was another Daniel
come to judgment" for the Judge had
ruled that it was Government prop
erty.
If the ruling of the court held good
of course it did not help Spreckels, be-
cause adverse possession could not run
against the Government, while G. A.
Brown would still have his sea beach.
One in possession was not obliged to
surrender to anyone but the owner.
Plaintiff claimed 100 feet of red soil
washed from the mountains and separ-
ated from the beach by a bank five
feet high.
''They had to yank that sea beach
away up there and plant it with pohue-
hue and sea sand" the attorney said.
The highest reach of a tidal wave, how
ever, did not constitute sea beach.
Concluding, Mr.. Kinney said they pro-
tested against the whole proceeding
from the morning when Loebenstein
went in with his shotgun to the time
when Mary Ailau was brought to the
front for sympathy The entire case of
the plaintiff was cheap and tawdry."
w. L. Stanley made the closing adj
dress for the plaintiff, occupying about
the same length of time as Mr.. Kinney
had done. Replying to certain remarks
he said the plaintiff was not going to
California to abuse Spreckels. No dang
ages were claimed as might properly be
done for unlawful occupation. There
was nothing ignoble about the plain
tiff's case unless it was ignoble for a
plain citizen like Mr.. Brown to oppose
the claims of Mr.. Sp-eckels.
They themselves jumped the land, "
counsel said-''jumped it to keep the
| heirs of Thomas Spencer OUT They
sat right there, hoping to hold the land
until the statute of limitations ran out.
when we bring them into court, "
Mr.. Stanley said they say this is their
protest against our methods" Against
such an attitude he placed the facts of
| the contest extending from 1899 to 1904,
| including four jury TRIALS before the
present one, with the attendance of
| parties and witnesses at Hilo, KaiIua
| and Honolulu.
Mr.. Brown paid $4,000 cash to Mrs.
| Pitman, who was not in a position to
| fight the power of Spreckels. Defend
ants claimed virtue because they came
into court and asked a verdict of jury,
| when the truth was they came into
| court because they had to.
| Counsel opposite professed to have
| claimed from first to last that the prop
erty was Government land. up to the
| time the Judge said to them You have
not proved adverse possession did you
hear one word about the Governments %
the speaker asked. Their whole cry
was that the land passed from Pitman
| to Spencer, until the court said possess
| sion against Spencer had not been
proved. Mr.. Kinneys whole claim was
| that this land was conveyed by Pit
man to Spencer. but by mistake was
/ left out of the deed.
Proceeding. Mr.. Stanley reviewed the
evidence. The grant in question was by
| metes and bounds on three sides. then
by the sea beach in front of the same
If the contention of the defendants was
right it would not be the sea beach
| in front OF the same" but 1.-The sea
beach in front of a piece of land that
was not granted
Mr.. Stanley explained that a strip of
the land was taken out for road and
argued against the contention that the
disputed property was not sea beach.
Judge Gear instructed the jury az "a
| bout 4 o'clock. As to one parcel of
| land in the case. he directed a verdict
| for the plaintiff.
at O'Clock the jury sent into court
for portions of the documentary evil
| dence Forty minutes later a SUNNY