The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-08-03


| The attorneys for A. w. Carter at
once secured a writ of prohibition from
the Chief Justice vacating Judge Gears
order as above and prohibiting Judge
Gear and J. 5. Low. next friend 4 TOM
proceeding further in the matter of the
restraining order. The writ is return
able August D.
Judge Gear was just about to cave
for HiIo when service of the writ Of
prohibition was made on him by the
High Sheriff.
PACIFIC STEEL o. X
The Pacific Steel and Hardware Com
pany of San Francisco represented in
this Territory by T. A. Hays, can
operate here as a business concern.
Judge Gear yesterday decided in favor
of the defendant company, his opinion,
in part, being as follows;
This is a bill in equity, brought by
the Territory ex rel its Attorney Gen
eraI against the Pacific Hardware &
Steel Co, a foreign corporation, and
T. A. Hays, its representative and en-
ploye, TO restrain them from carrying
on business within the Territory.
The complaint alleges that the cor
poration is not engaged in the bust
ness of foreign interstate commerce
nor is ii an employe of the u s. Gov
eminent, but that nevertheless it has
failed to comply with the requirements
of the statute relating to foreign COR
porations, and therefore the complain
ant asks that it and its agent be en-
joined from carrying on business in the
Territory.
The answers of the respondents ad-
nit that the corporation is a foreign
corporation, but alleges that all the
business done In the Territory lis done
as a part of the foreign or interstate
commerce of the U. S. A.; that the
business is and has been an order bust
ness
1t is alleged that the Office is main
tanned for the purpose Of showing SAM
pies and receiving orders by Respond
ent Hays as an employee and not as an
officer of the corporation, and only FOR
his personal use and not for the use of
any officer or stakeholder of the cor
poration.
The evidence shows that for ABOUT
two years last past respondent Hays
has acted as an employee of the re-
spondent corporation, acted as their
representative. The corporation car
ries no stock of goods in this Terri
tory. Hays receives a salary for his
services and is allowed a certain sum
for expenses.
The broad question in the case is
whether or not the corporation falls
within the category of foreign corpor-
ations required by Act SO of 1903. to
comply with the provisions of said act.
Counsel for the Government contends
that the defendant corporation having
opened an Office here, has acquired a
domicile here and that having failed to
comply with the statute it should be
enjoned from doing business in. the
Territory.
After an exhaustive review of the
authorities have found no case which
holds tS t a foreign corporation doing
a business of strictly commerce, inter
state or foreign, has been held to be
subject to the Legislative control of
State or Territory
OF course if the foreign corporation
not only opens an office in the State or
Territory where it seeks to do business,
but carries a stock of goods in such
State or Territory, then it becomes SUBJ
ject to Legislative control, for it is
then doing a purely local business as
distinguished from interstate or for
eign business. But no case can be
found that I know of in which there
has not been local business carried
on with goods actually in such State
where the courts have held that the |
foreign corporation could be controlled |
by the legislature
1t appearing that the defendant cor
poration carries no stock of goods here, |
but fills all its orders by shipment |
from California direct to the custom |
ers here, and that it is engaged in a |
business of strict commerce. it follows !
that it falls within the exception in
the statute as a corporation engaged
in the business of foreign or interstate
commerce., and cannot be enjoined /
from carrying on business in this Ter
ritory. The respondents are therefore
entitled to judgment and it Will be so
ordered
Deputy Attorney General E. C. Pet
ers for the Territory Castle & With
ington and Holmes & Stanley for re-
spondents.
STILL OWES BIG SUM.
Judge De Bolt yesterday filed an or
der approving Commissioner J. F. Nor
gan's return and account of sales of
the property of the defendant in the
foreclosure case of A. Lidgate VS. Ho-
nolulu Clay Company, Ltd 1t is or
dered that the sum of $4S55, shall be
credited to the costs, charges and eX-
penses, and that the balance of the
proceeds of sale, $442225 be paid to A.
Iidgate, the petitioner as a credit on
the total judgment of so. SOS. 90 and the
clerk of the court is directed to docket
a judgment against the defendant for
the sum of S6243.71, this being the
amount unpaid on account
COURT NOTES
Judge Dole of the Federal Court, left
for Eva yesterday to spend a few
days.