Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1907-10-15
sILLIMAN TELLS HIS STORY
CONTINUED from Page y

was done Mr.. Lowrie not only because
the contract was broken at time of
general depression In Island securl-
ties, but also because of the way In
which 1t was done,-no notice what
ever or any possible chance to be
heard having been given him. More
over II was done at the very moment
that the greater part of his plan OF
improvement to increase the yield of
the plantation had been carried to the
point of completion, thus enabling the
Company to reap the fruits of his fore
eight without any recompense to him.
The fact Is, as you undoubtedly know,
he actually lost of his own good money
over $27,50O mot including interesD 4,
TO say nothing Of the profits he count
cd on making when he gave up the
Waialua offer with its salaries OF 49,
500 per year and $4,000 worth Of paid
up stock"
The affidavit then goes on to tell OF
an appointment made with w. X. Cas-.
tie at the Parker House in Boston at
II a. m. June 10th. 1t was at the
opening OF this conversation that Cas-.
ties remark regarding Baldwin ID said
to have been made.
Castle is quoted as remarking that
he told the plaintiff Lowrie In 1909
that he didn't know what the defend.
ant Baldwin and s. r. Alexander were
thinking about when they let him out
and refused to take his stock when he
offered 1t to them on the Island OF
Maui, after the breach of contract aud
said Castle further said, "They know
our syndicate needed that stock to
make up the control, and | said tn
Lowrie, Lowrie, you must not sell any
of your stock until have had talk
with George and the members OF our
family and until We have decided what
we will do about IT,"
Then, talking to Silliman, Castle is
quoted, "You know we had a pooling
agreement and that under its terms
we could not sell our stock without
first Offering it to the Others"
Silliman said, 81 don't think Lowrle
signed that agreement"
Castle replied, "Oh, yes, | think he
did-we wouldn't have let him have
that stock unless he had signed the
agreement" Castle then said, II sup
pose you will serve formal demand
before bringing suit"
Silliman then handed Castle form
of complaint prepared in New York
for filing in Hawaii.
Silliman AYERS that there was some
talk of compromise on the basis OF re
turning to plaintiff Lowrie the $500
shares taken over by the Castles or
,ayment at the rate Of $50. per share
plus interest and less dividends. Cas-
tie then said that his brother Jame'
vas coming to Boston; he knew more
about the facts In the case and hi
would telegraph him. w. r. Castle
then invited Silliman to go to a bal
yame with him that afternoon and re
turned to the Victoria Hotel.
After the ball game Silliman tolt
Castle that he was going to Maine fol
short trip and would return in foul
days. Castle said he had sent cop!
cf the complaint to Wilmington in Ho
holulu, and wanted another, which wal
furnished him that evening.
When Silliman returned from Maine
he communicated with w. r. Castle Il
learn the whereabouts of James b
Castle. Mr. j. b. Castle said ther'
were papers pertaining to the case II
Honolulu and he would talk of 1t II
Honolulu but preferred not to In Bos
ton. Then Silliman served forma
demand on w. r. Castle and left
copy for James b. Castle. w. r. Cas-
tie made formal reply denying liza
bility and advising Silliman to go /,
Honolulu and not bring the suit II
Boston.
The affidavit then deals with the in
tricate details OF serving the paper
and bringing the suit in Boston. IL
says there has been no other delay II
the progress of the suit other thai
that occasioned by the condition OF tn
calendar of the Massachusetts, court
Silliman finally declares on informa
tion and belief that the attorneys TO
the defendant in the Boston suit moN
ed to take dispositions in San Francis
co, Chicago and Honolulu on oral g,
animation and without naming any o
the proposed witnesses; that plain
tins counsel opposed said motion an,
thereupon a stipulation was propose,
or entered into between the attorney
for the plaintiff and the attorneys 10
defendants but afterward the attorney
for the defendants said they did no
wish to take any further steps regard
Ing new depositions and the matte
vas dropped.
Silliman says the action is brough
in good faith and with the idea O
prosecuting to final judgment as sool
| ns nOSSibla