The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1909-12-14
MAYBE ARIZONA
WAS 4 GHOST
Her Share in Pulling Celtic Chief
Off the Reef Seems
Rather Ethereal.

Steam Navigation Company against th'
British ship Celtic Chief. 1t contains
some interesting information regarding
the movements OF the vessels that tool
part in pulling the windjammer off the
reef, the same not being hitherto known
by the general public.
In the first place the company has Ii
beled her for $50, goo, and its president
ID. a Kennedy, swears to it as being the
amount which the company thinks It Is
entitled to for bringing the vessel back
into the paths of virtue.
Part OF the libel is as follows: q
That said ship Celtic Chief was pulled
off said reef with her cargo and saved
from total loss solely by and through
the efforts of the said steamers Helene,
MikahaIa, Likelike and Mauna Kea
of said Inter-Isiand Steam Navigation
Company, save and except some services
rendered by the tug Intrepid and also
some assistance rendered by the Miller
Salvage Company, Ltd, and some very
slight assistance by the German cruiser
Aroma.
Now it has been generally supposed
that the ArcOna was responsible for the
final jerk that took the Celtic Chief
off the reef and although the mosquito
fleet did yeoman service in hanging on
to the hawsers in the manner they did,
still it always struck the people that
his Imperial Majesty's engines did lit
tie, too.
However, the libel duly ascribes the
Arcona IS part in the pull little before
this by saying "That said steamers
Helene, Mikahaia, and Likelike did pull
said ship Celtic Chief off said reef and
did cause her to be floated into deep
water and after being foated into
deep water the German cruiser Arcona
towed her out to sea. -
In the opening the company gives the
value of their boats with the following
figures: Helene, 61S tons, $4,000; Mi.
kahala, 444 tons, $4,000; Likelike, 374
tons, 100000; and Mauna Kea, 1866
tons, $350,000. Smith & Lewis are at
torneys for the company.
Bond Files Answer.
Late yesterday afternoon Robert E.
Bond fled his answer to the suit
brought against him by his aunt, Ellen
NJ. Bickneli, in which he denies most
of her principal allegations In the
suit, Mrs. Bicknell claimed that he had
"done'' her out of money by purehas-
ing from her at a comparatively small
figure certain stocks that afterwards
rose high in value,
The defendant denies that Mrs. Biek-
nell is wholly unaccustomed to and I'M
acquainted with business affairs and
unable to comprehend or understand or
binary transactions relating to business
as is alleged in the complaint Bond
also says that she has % for MANY wears
past managed and controlled and still
manages and controls her own not IN
considerable property and estate"
With becoming modesty,' he adj
mits the allegations in the complaint
that he is an able business man. He
gives a condensed statement of the
events in which the stock in question
figured before coming into the control
of Mrs. Bicknell, varying but little
from the complainant IS version.
''Said defendant,' he says in his;
answer, "avers that the acquisition by
him from plaintiff of shares of the com
mon stock was an ordinary business
transaction entered into by him from
plaintiff in utmost good faith. = And
defendant further AYERS that no per-
suasion of any kind was brought to
bear upon plaintiff to induce her to as
sign and transfer said shares of the
common stock to defendant
Bond also states that although she.
said in the suit that those shares of
the common stock transferred were
worth not less than $4,000, they were
really worth but $4,000.
He alleges that she made two agree
fnents with him, one superseded by the,
other, in anticipation of the receipt Of
the shares by which she agreed to trans
fer them over to him. He also claims
that no outside influence was brought
to bear on her, but in the drawing m,
of the last agreement she was coun--
sel"d by her sons, DIR. Henry Bicknell.
practising dentist, and James Bick-
nell, the city and county auditor.
In further answering he says, that
since the acquiring by him of said
shares of common stock from the, said
plaintiff, the interests of third parties
have interviewed to an extent that 1t is
impossible for him TO return an,F re-.
assign said shares of common stock to
plaintiff
Holmes, Stanley and Olson are rep
| resenting Bond.
| Juries Drawn.