The Hawaiian gazette., 1904-10-02
KOOLAU
PROTESTS
Against Watson Having
Ills License Re-
newed.

against the renewal or restoration OF
the right OF David Watson for him to
again practice law IN the district
courts, was made matter of court
record yesterday when It was place
on file among other legal papers. The
petition is as follows:
Koolauloa. Oahu, Aug 10. 1904.
To Lorrin Andrews, Attorney General.
Territory of Hawaii.
Sir: We, the undersigned American
citizens and voters residing In the dis
trict of Koolauloa Island of oahu, 90
hereby present to you our petition
praying against the renewal or restor-
alton to David Watson of license to
practice law before the district coupts
of this Territory, which said license
was revoked by Circuit Judge Robin
son, Third Judge of the Circuit Court,
First Circuit, in decision rendered by
him and against the said David Wat
son, and which decision we do hereby
uphold and approve, on the very
ground that we are familiar with his
corrupt works. That we are all OF
one opinion. that If the said license
be renewed and restored to the said
David Watson. he will be exercising
more of his corrupt works towards all
the citizens residing within this dis
trict, and will also be doing extortion-
ate works towards poor people in the
district.
And further. we do hereby approve
that decision rendered by the said Cir
cult Judge Robinson of the Circuit
80 tl,a M, ne
Hawaii, the same being correct and
proper in every way.
(signed BY 25 PERSONS.
AN ODD DEFENSE.
H. NJ. Dow by his attorney Geo. A.
Davis makes a general denial to the
complaint of plaintiff in the action of,
j. Alfred Magoon VS.. H. NJ. Dow, de-
fendant, ]. H. Fisher, auditor, gar
nishee. The defendant makes the fol-
lowing statement as being the defense
he will rely upon to prove his case:
THAT the said promissory note set
out in the complaint was made and de-
livered by the defendant to the plain
tiff in connection with certain mort
gage as a matter of form only and up
on the understanding and agreement
that the defendant would not be called
upon to pay the said note, and there
never was any value or consideration
for the making of the said note by
the said defendant, and the said plain
tiff first took and always held the same
without any value or consideration"
McCHEsNEY LOSES.
The jury in the ejectment case of
The First National Bank of Hawaii
VS. ]. D. Gaines. G. NJ. McChesney and
Alice NJ. McChesney, rendered a di-
rected verdict for the plaintiff on the
ground that the plaintiff having pro-
duced evidence showing title to be in
the bank, and not sufficient evidence
being introduced as would contradict
the evidence of the plaintiff. The ver-
dict was as follows:
We, the jury, find for the plaintiff
for the restitution of the property de-
scribed in the complaint, together with
the sum of $166.65 being the rents, is
sues and profits arising therefrom from
and after the 1st day of April, 1904.
THE FAMILY GROWS.
F. E. Thompson, guardian ad Item
of the Mersberg minors, has filed a de-
murrer in the case of John A. Cummins
VS.. j. o. Carter, trustee under deed of
trust to him made by John A. Cum
Minis, dated October /, 1896, ct al, bill
for cancellation of trust deed. The
demurrer sets forth that it does not
appear in the bill by the deed of trust
was not the voluntary and free act of
the plaintiff; that the plaintiff has been
guilty of gross and ineXcusable laches
in presenting the same and that he Is
now barred from so doing by said
laches.
That 1t does not appear in said bill
that all the necessary parties have
been Joined in the cause in that it
does not appear that Thos. b. Cum
Minis, Matilda X. Walker, Jane B.
Merseberg and May l. Creighton re-
ferred to in the deed, have been join
ed as parties.
That it appears also that there is
a misjoinder of parties defendant In
that Adolph Constable, Barney JOY
and John Doe Blaisdell are Joined as
parties defendant by virtue of their |
being husbands of certain other par
ties defendant named in said bill.
CONFESSED JUDGMENT.
In the case of the Wilmerding-Loew
Co. VS.. Lawrence II. Dee, the defendant |
confesses judgment to the plaintiff in
the sum OF s2O25,65.
MANOA WATER DECISION.
The Supreme Court yesterday hand
ed down q decision In the case of Lum
All Lee ct al. vs.. All Soong ct al, dam
ages, IN which the decision for plain
tiff In the lower court, and from which
the defendant appealed from, II af-
iirmed. The syllabus II as follows:
The plalntiff claims that damage 10
taro crop caused by defendants ille-
gal diversion of water held properly as
sessed io defendants, although drouth
was the cause Of partial failure of
crop. allowance having been made IN
the award for the proportion of loss
sustained by the dfoulh upon other taro
lrops IN the vicinity,
The faro lands referred a. are lsnai'
~ in Aan0a. The water ~ question
i0wlnR oyer certain dam called the
lftaltl4I dam HluluftuH Harr awarded |