The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1907-05-04
CASTLE TELLS
OF MAKA CLAIM
SAYS THAT THE GOVERNOR DID
HIM AND REV. MAKA GREAT
INJUSTICE.

| INJUSTICE.
The following communication from
w. r. Castle, relative to claim that
was turned down by the legislature,
appeared in the Advertiser this morn
ing:
Editor Advertiser: My attention has
been called to a report in the Bulletin
of May LIST, of the Governors veto Of
an item of $25OO for Rev. r. Mako for
premises taken in widening Beretania
street. AS the Governor does great in
justice to Mr. Maka, as well as to me.
1 ask for little space to correct his
errors and mistakes. 1t illustrates the
Importance of people, especially public
men, knowing what they are talking
about, because of the injury they may
do.
The Governor says: ."Beretania
street was widened some time in the
year 1900, and in doing this the then
administration took some 65s square
feet of the land owned by r. Maka.
The neighboring property is valued, for
taxation purposes, at about go cents
per square foot. But even allowing 81
per square foot the claim would only
amount to 1863, and therefore AN ap-
preparation of $25OO is out of all pro-
portion.
! CASTLE THE CLAIMANT.
ut also appears, according to the COR
respondence on file in the office of the
Superintendent of Public Works, that
Mr.. w. r. Castle purchased this claim
| from Mr. r. Maka, so that any appro-
priation passed by the Legislature of
the Territory of Hawaii should be in
the name of w. r. Castle"
Of course Maka is entitled to the
damage he sustained by reason of the
| street Improvement in 1900, not today.
This damage was and is far more than
the value of the $50 feet taken, for it
cut off large slice from a small lot,
making it nearly impossible to get a
tenant. Before the fire he had an in
come of $35 to $40 per month. 1t
was all cut off by that catasthrope,
and for five years he got nothing. Then
by number of sacrifices he secured
tenant at $25 per month"; which is
the present income.
When the street was widened he was
assured that he would be paid for his
land, but, though all sorts of PROPOSE
tions were made, nothing resulted.
Finally, a land exchange was proposed,
which seemed all right, and he saw
told to go ahead on that basis. On
this I acted, and finally wrote to the
department that 1 had credited him
with $1,000, which was considered fair,
and the land had been conveyed to
me. The time having arrived for ac-
ton, we were informed that the gov
eminent did not approve of that plan.
So the deed was destroyed and the
book entries reversed. Still the Gov
eminent kept his land and made no
offer of compensation. At last petit
ton was handed to Mr.. Kaleiopu and
the Legislature inserted the item $250O.
1t passed the Senate, as well as the
House. Mr.. Maka and 1 appeared be-
fore the Committee of the House and
fully explained the matter.
1t was clear that L had no interest,
and equally clear that Mr.. Maka had
Governor, but failed. Neither Maka
nor 1 were asked to see and explain
to him. He was in duty bound to as
sumo that the Legislature had not act
ed foolishly or criminally; instead Of
which, there is but one inference from
his veto message.
He is wrong as to his allegation
about taxes. Maka paid taxes for 1899
on about $2.75 a square foot In 1900
with the old shanties burned off, on
about 1925; 1901, on $3.50; 1902, near
ly $2.45, and for the next four years
on about $3.50 a foot. Yet the Gov
ernor says, "neighboring property is
taxed at about 60 cents per square
foot!" The $1,000 which seemed about
right in 1900, with interest at 8 per
cent, not compounded, amounts now to
$2O2S, and the general damage to his
lot, the same being cut so very small,
easily runs to $4,000.
great wrong is done this aged Ha-
waiian citizen, and greatly blame the
Senate for not standing to it's former
action and overriding the Veto instead
of meekly taking the slap in the face
given by the Governor. Let me add
that Maka is not indebted to me a
cent
Very sincerely yours,