The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1909-10-21
HAVE CORPORATE INTERESTS
BOUND COURTS OF JUSTICE?
Lorrin Andrews in Facetious Brief Demands
to Know if 1t Is Medieval to Protect
the Weak

NOcdte seems TO IdDOr Is IndI III tHe
lengthy and exhaustive brief which
he has filed, he seems TO have forgol-
ten those maxims of equity which
should have been inculcated prior to
graduation from law school, to wit,
HE WHO SEEKS EQUITY MUST
Do EQUITY which certainly with all
the learning displayed in said brief is
nowhere in evidence on the part of
plaintiff, unless the word 'do' is used,
not in its orthodox sense but which
tempt, in the slang of the period, to-
wit, 'do ITO deliver knockout
blow to, which certainly plaintiff and
it's attorneys are attempting to do, not
only to equity in the abstract, but to
the defendants in concrete, who are
endeavoring to obtain justice at the
hands of the tribunals of this country.
FWe would call the court 8 and coun-
sci IS attention further to the equally
well known maxim THAT HE WHO
COMES INTO EQUITY MUST COME
WITH CLEAN HANDS and respect
fully submit that all the pulling and
hauling that plaintiff has done in order
to drag this case from its proper domi-
cile in the county of Maui where the
witnesses reside and where the locus
of the action remains, must have left
some appreciate stains of dirt upon
the otherwise immaculate palms of the
numerous and expensive legal advo-
Gates of corporate greed and interest,
who in this case are seeking to snatch
from the parched lips of the inhabitants
of Waikiki, the water which is neces-
sary for their preservation.
"counsel proceeds to quote number
of statutes in different States as to
change of venue in actions at law and
gives decisions constituting said statutes
which we respectfully submit have no
bearing at all upon the point involved
in this motion.
"He does quote Section 1853 of the
Revised Laws, which has nothing to do
with the present situation or the trans
ference by one judge Of a cause to
another judge, but merely provides for
the filling of vacancy for any cause
whatsoever. He attempts to dispose of
defendants argument that a court of
equity viii protect the weak and see
that justice is done. by the following
sneering phrase:
F'The discussion in defendants brief
in which it is substantially stated that
equity will relieve from every incon-
venience from which litigants may
suffer a distinctly medieval in tone
Corporate Insolence.
elias ever corporate insolence gone
farther than this statement of their
hirelings? Medieval to do Justice.
Medieval to protect the weak from
the strong! If it be medieval to pro,
tect the poor man from corporate
greed, if our law and judges are now
SO bound by corporate red tape and
fettered by technical statutes that they
cannot relieve the oppressed from I'M
just abuse by rich corporations, if
courts and laws are powerless and jus.
tice is out of date and medieval, then
it is time that we took page from
the middle ages and armed cap-a-pie
sever the letters and red tape by which
the corporation ogre has tied our Judges
and by the decision of this motion
free our captive courts from their in
solent oppressor.
1t is further respectfully submitted
that in no portion of the said brief
does he attempt to justify by any rules
Of justice or right, the contention which
his position forces him to take. to wit,
that if he is correct he has a right
to bring any equitable case in which
the parties and witnesses NAV reside
! in Hawaii and by reason of bringing
said suit IN court of equity can have
it tried before circuit Judge on the
Island of Kauai and force the defend
ant, who may be destitute. to bring his
witnesses and himself to the Island Of
Kauai despite his protests or lose all
of his rights and have judgment taken
+ against him by default It is not be-
lievable. This jurisdiction. he admits,
does not obtain in actions at law in
this Territory where the various cir
! cults have control over property sit
| uated in their circuit. But he serious
" contends that this injustice can be
perpetrated by means of a court in
equity. It is not believable that any
such harsh law could ever obtain in
equity practise either in this Territory
or in any State of the Union
No Chance for Fair Trial.
In replying to the argument set forth
in points and 4 of the brief in OPP
position to the motion, it is respect
fully submitted that despite the exces-
sivelv technical objection set forth
Hereunder that the afidavits and the
record in this case do present a cause
of action which in the discretion of an
equity judge should move him to grant
this motion. The situation in which
the defendants find themselves is too
clear to need further explanation. There
can be no chance of a fair or impartial
trial where it is held away from the
witnesses and away from the locality
which is the scene of the controversy.
cit is impossible for defendants at
this time TO name what witnesses viii
be required, because they do not know
what evidence viii be offered by the