The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1905-09-15
IH|GHTON'S
MESSAGE
Brings Waterlooto
the Opposite
Side.
Restraining Order From
the Chief Justice
Stops Talk.
Relieves o Dilemma In Carter
Male Case--Labor
Day Gag.

hearing of the J. o. Carter ct al. VS..
Koolau Male ct al. ejectment case
yesterday afternoon, which was al
most dramatic. e. B. McClanahan
wondered, not only why c. W. Ash
ford took longer than a Honolulu La
point, but also why he regarded with
angelic equanimity a ruthless massa-
ere of minutes by himself (McC) on
behalf of plaintiff. His wonder ended.
as he laughingly confessed, when, aft
err Henry E. Highton had ambled into
the courtroom and delivered a stage
whisper into his associates ear, Ash
ford capped the climax of endless OBJ
jections to the proceedings with the
information that the Chief Justice had
issued a restraining order against the
present further hearing of the case.
AS previously reported Judge Lind
say some days ago sustained the de-
murrer and dismissed Mrs. Males bill
for an injunction against the eject
ment proceedings. There had been a
stipulation on file in the ejectment
case, waving jury and agreeing to a
hearing on 2A hours notice from either
side. Therefore, when the bill was dis
missed, McClanahan moved to set the
case for trial following the Colburn-
Holt hearing. So the parties by coun-
sci came in at p. m. yesterday.
McClanahan for plaintiffs was ready
to proceed. Ashford for defendants
ly before Judge Lindsay, having been
assigned to Judge Robinson as one of
the ven-numbered cases. The order
setting the case for trial by Judge
Lindsay was therefore invalid.
Judge Lindsay proposed that the
case be reassigned to himself and then
he could go on with the hearing.
Judge Robinson now came in and,
taking the bench with the second
judge, was about making an order re-
assigning the case when Ashford
sprang the Labor Day gag. He at
tackled the jurisdiction of the court,
| in the person of any judge, on the
ground that the case at bar was a
term case and the September term
had lapsed from not having been
opened on the first Monday in Sep
TENDER. Judge Robinson overruled the
| objection, holding he had power at
chambers to make assignments. There
upon he reassigned the case to his
colleague.
| Ashford then renewed the objection
he had offered to Judge Robinson that
the September term was dead and gone
Mechanism desired the court to rule
on the point. when Ashford could take
his exceptions and the trial proceed.
| Judge Lindsay, however, intfmated
his reluctance to make a ruling on that
question. as Judge Robinson had re-
served it for the Supreme Court and
| he dindsay) was called to sit there
today for hearing it. He did not think
/ it would be right for him to disquali-
fly himself from that duty.
| 1t was the discussion Of this phase
| of the matter which Ashford evinced
a Discrimination to curtan His in
! difference to the exhaustion of time
and his apparent delight in opposing
counsels flow of language only be-
came understood, as heretofore men
toned, when the senior counsel for de-
! PENDANTS, like another Butcher, arrived
on the scene with potent relief to the
| beleaguered garrison.
| der cites the respondents and appel
lees in the Maile-Carter injunction case
to appear before him at his chambers
on September 10 at 10 a. m ito show
cause, if any they have, why a tenn
porary injunction should not be grant
ed, pending the appeal in said cause,
according to the prayer of the bill OF
complaint therein, and that meanwhile
and until the hearing and decision un-
der this order, the respondents and
! appellees, their attorneys, solicitors,
agents and servants, and each of them,
be restrained accordingly
! The petition for the order shows that
a bond in $3.50 is up for the protection
j of respondents pending a decision, be-
sides which petitioners state their
Willingness to have their appeal adj
Vanced at the October term, also ex-
press their readiness to protect the
respondents in the rental value of the
disputed premises, now in possession
OF compliments, by a good and suffi-
cient bond in such amount as the Su-
preme Court NAV determine