The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1904-06-21

l.. C. Ables, excused from civil
| jury In Judge Gears court the pre-
vious day because he said he would
strike balance for himself on tbs
law as between the exposltions of coun
sci without guidance OF the court. mar
rated that incident but counsel on botl
sides were satisfied with him notwith
standing.
THE HILO CASE.
A. =. Loebenstein's examination II
the Hilo waterfront ejectment case o.
c. A. Brown VS.. J. d. Spreckels ant
others before Judge Gear, was con-
cluded early in the afternoon. Mary
Ailau was next called and remained
on the witness stand the rest OF the
day.
Once, when j. A. Magoon withdrew
question under objection by w. 4.
Kinney while Mr. Loebenstein was oil
the stand, Mr.. Kinney caused laugh
by moving that it appear on the rec
ord that Mr.. Magoon had backed
down for once in his life"
Afiidavits filed at Hilo to procure
a change of venire of this cause to
Honolulu are by w. NJ Giffard. bust
ness associate of the Spreckels. and G..
c. Kennedy and j. w. Mason, promi-
nent business men of Hilo. Mr.. Ken
nedy's allegations are to the effect that
there Is such a strong and general
prejudice on the part of the people
of Hilo against the Spreckels brothers,
on account of their lack of sympathy
with the town and of public spirit In
developing 1t, that they could not get
a fair trial there.
ISAAC NOAR'S FIGHT.
Isaac Noar has brought cross COM
plant in equity against Lee Chu and
c. *. All, upon his alleged rights and
interest in the Star Block premises,
Fort and Kukui streets. His attorney
is c. w. Ashford. After describing the
premises, stating that the rents there
from amount to 1925 month, claiming
that he owns a seven-siXteenths inter-
est in the property and relating the
suit brought against himself and his
daughter, Julia Noar, by the defend
ants, the complainant charges:
That after the filing by defendants
of their original bill they, 'wrongfully
and wickedly contriving to cheat. OPP
press and defraud your orator in the
premises, did combine and confederate
and agree together that they would
refuse to pay interest on a certain
mortgage and that they would collect
and appropriate to their own uses and
purposes the rents and revenues of the
property; to the further pur-
pose that they would prevent the col
lection of rents by this complainant and
the application of the money to the
obligations, and to the still
further purpose of forcing a sale of the
under foreclosure of the mort
gage.
The complaint goes on to say that the
defendants did allow the payments Of
interest on the mortgage to lapse, until
on July l, 1903, there was 500 overdue
and that, on January %, 1904, the prop
erty was sold under foreclosure, the
defendants being the purchasers for the
price of $1,000.
Mr.. Noar declares that this price was
grossly inadequate and that such in
adequacy of price was the result of the
of litigation between defend
ants and himself. His prayers ending
the complaint are:
That defendants be summoned to APP
pear before the court and answer the
in this complaint and be
thereafter bound by the proceedings.
That defendants be compelled to come
Continued on page g.