The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1908-11-27

ments of the Civic Federation. Other
signers of the memorial are Justice A.
s. Hartwell, who was not Chief Justice
at that time; by Justice A. A. Wilder,
Judge w. j. Robinson, Judge J. T. De
Bolt, Federal Judge Sanford B. Dole,
Professor A. F. Grifiths, of Oahu Col
lege; Ralph S. Hosmer, Territorial For
ester; Professor NJ. NJ. Scott, George r.
Carter, James w. Pratt, the Land Com
missioner; W. j. COelho, Territorial
Senator of the second district; George
G. Hewitt, senator from the first dis
trict; w. H. Babbitt Superintendent of
Public Instruction; j. K. Kalanianaole,
Delegate to Congress; Governor A. S.
Cleghorn, and others.
"These are not merely signers of a
petition, but are the signatures to in
dividual letters, expressing the senti-
ments of the writer's. These signatures
were sent on to Washington during the
progress of the debate as to the selec-
tion of the site.
''It must be clear that neither Secre-
tary Garfield nor Secretary Winthrop
are men that can be Influenced, that is
by ex parte influence that might be
brought to bear They are both men
who hear, see and read and then make
up their minds. The matter was by no
means new to Secretary Winthrop when
/ took it up with him. He was in favor
of it from the first and had made up
his mind before I saw him as to the ad-
vantages of the Palace Square site. He
was only looking for some means by
which to bring about the exchange"
A Contrary Opinion.
4'I have not overlooked the fact that
one purpose of the condemnation pro-
ceedings in the Mahuka site was to
perfect the title,'' said the Federal
official quoted in yesterdays Adver-
tiser, when told of what Judge Cooper
had said in reply to his interview.
But the decree by which the title
to the property is given by the United
States sets out the allegation of the
petition for condemnation that the land
is wanted for a public purpose, namely
for a federal building site in accordance
with the Act of Congress providing for
such building and site The decree
recites that the land is condemned for
that purpose and that title lodges in
the United States for that purpose.
Now this is conclusive, unless the |
1 iolHicI ONueIS are eSIOppeu from SET |
ting up an abandonment of the property |
by the United States-and the failure !
to use it for the purpose of a federal |
building site, and the transfer of it to |
a private individual would seem to be |
an abandonment. Then would they be |
estopped from setting up abandonment |
by reason of the fact that they were
willing to sell to the United States and |
had agreed on the price and the con
lemnatiOn proceedings had for an OBJ
iect the perfecting of the title2 Hard
". in view of the fact that the offer of
he property was expressly for a fed
'ral building site. and for nothing else
Il was not a ease of the United States
'aying, We want this piece of land;
what will YOU take for it,? but the
fer was. What win you take for this
'iece of land if we will put a federal
building on it?'
''There is certainly nothing in this
Inconsistent with the recitals in the de-
rec, nor inconsistent with the legal
onclusions and consequences of the de-
rec. and therefore nothing to estop
hem from asserting any rights the de-
rec would give them -