Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1904-08-02
AA(KF[LD LIABLE
FOR DREDGING

Three unanimous decisions were
this forenoon rendered by the Supreme
Court. Thirteen opinions have thus
far been filed by the new Bench and
all have been unanimous.
Associate Justice Hatch writes the
opinion Of the court in w. r. Clark
and Samuel Henry. copartners under
the firm name of Clark & Henry, vs..
II. Hackfeld & Co., Ltd. and Castle n
Cooke, Ltd, exceptions from Circuit
Court, action of assumpsit, finding for
the plaintiffs, overriding the excep-
lions of defendants II. Hackfeld g.
Co, Ltd.
The following extracts from the
lengthy opinion tell the story of the
case and the findings OF the court:
A written instrument addressed to q
firm of contractors, and signed by the
respective agents OF two corporations,
which recites that the agents knowing
that the directors of the corporation
have this day pledged the above com.
panies to pay you $4,000 upon the
opening Of Pearl Harbor, by the com.
pletion by you. and the acceptance by
the United States Government of a
channel into said Pearl Harbor OF 200
feet wide at the bottom and 30 feet
deep. do hereby guarantee said pay.
ment as per resolutions passed. copies
of which are in your possession" Is an
absolute and Independent undertaking
on the part of those signing 1t to make
the payment upon the contingency sta.
ted. and not collateral contract Of
guaranty dependent for its validity up.
on the existence OF another contract
between the corporations and the con.
tractors.
The fact that the resolution of the
directors of one, OF the companies
pledged the company to pay part of
the $4,000. provided that the agents
of the company ARE satisfied that the
opening of the channel to Pearl Har'
Dor will open the same to commerce."
and that the. contract of the defend.
ants was to guarantee said payment
as per resolutions passed" did not rem
der II necessary, In order to make such
agents liable on their contract, for the
contractors TO prove that the agents
were satisfied after the work was com.
pleted, that II opened the harbor 10
commerce, as the action Of the agents
In signing the contract amounted to
an unequivocal expression of satisfac-
ton on their part that the opening of
the channel, according to the specin.
cations, would open the same to com.
meree.
This Is an action OF assumpsit,
brought by the plaintiffs, Clark & Hen.
cry, against II. Hackfeld & Co.. Ltd.
and Castle & Cooke, Ltd, upon a writ.
ten undertaking to guarantee the pay
ment to the plaintiffs OF the sum Of
$4,000 upon their completion of Ger.
tain dredging work, and the acceptance
OF the same by the United States Gov
eminent. The United States, through
the appropriate Office of the Engineer
Corps OF the Army, had called for ten,
ders for dredging a channel through
the bar at the entrance to Pearl Har.
Dor In the Island Of Oahu. The amount
OF the appropriation availaSle not ap.
pearing to be sufficient to pay the cost
OF the undertaking, and 1t appearing
that the opportunity to have this har-
Dor opened might be lost for long
and indefinite period. II the appropria.
ton then made available by Congress
was not expended at that time. private
parties interested in the work. took
steps to induce bidders to undertake
contract.
The plaintiffs, relying upon the fore.
going assurances (given by Castle &
Cooke and II. Hackfeld & Co. for GER
tain plantations). put In tender and
obtained a contract for dredging a
channel as aforesaid. This contract
they faithfully carried out. to the sat
isfaction of the Federal officials, who
accepted the work and paid the con-
tract price. Demand was then made
by the plaintiffs upon the defendants
for the payment Of said sum of s26, 900.
Not obtaining payment, action was
brought. The defendant II. Hackfeld