The Hawaiian gazette., 1912-03-29
ATTORNEY GENERAL
SCORED IN BRIEF
Counsel for Hawaii Homesteader
Makes Hot Reply to Charges
Before Supreme Court.

(Mail Special to The Adyertisor)
HILO, March 26.-Attorney Harry
Irwin, representative of Homesteader
Henderson, has finished an answer to
the brief which the attorney general s
department recently submitted to the
supreme court. 1t is booklet of forty
eight pages, which goes into all the
questions raised very fully.
In several places the brief attacks
the attorney general. In reference to
the contention that the proceedings
take the nature Of an equity matter,
the brief says: "Would a court of
equity listen patiently to the bubble
that the sub-agent s letter referred to
trees growing on the land and not to
trees growing in the gulehes'i 1t
would seem that the less the petitioner
has TO say about equitable principles,
the better it would be for his case. !"
Later on the brief says anent equity:
eff counsel still insists that this pro
ceeding is equitable in nature, it could
pNaiCCiy uO oAAu that JhC ihAu uCDuEb-
ment is acting equitably when through
its lawful agents this appellee has been
induced not to do certain things which
they now claim to be essential, and
having relieved him of $16l0 in cash,
to now say that he is not entitled to
the land for which he has paid, because
he had failed to do the very thing which
they instructed him not to do.p
Quotes Governor.
In regard to the policy of the Ter
ritory, the brief says in part: "Gov-
ernor Frear is one of those upon whom
is cast the duty of administering the
land laws of this Territory; according
to his report, under the 1895 land act,
the chief concern seems to have been
to get people to take the land, but
that with changes which increased the
Inducements for taking homestead
lands for speculative purposes and the
discovery of 'evading the spirit of the
homestead laws, it became necessary
to make radical changes in the law. :
Why did ''radIcal changes in the law
become necessary unless the taking of
homestead lands for Speculative pur
poses and the methods of 'evading the
spirit of the homestead laws were legal
at the time, lie, prior to said amend
ments7 1t is: apparent that by Gov
ernor Frear's construction of the Land
Act of 1895 it was legally possible to
speculate in homestead lands and
legally possible to 'evade the spirit of
the homestead laws; otherwise no
radical changes in the law would
have been necessary.
Governor Frear's remarks concern
ing speculative entry ON homestead
lands become doubly interesting and
valuable when it is considered that he,
as Chief Justice of the Territory, wrote
the opinion in Fishel VS.. Turner, an
opinion which upheld the right of spec
ulative entry"
Laugh at "Plot.,'
With regard to the attack made on
the testimony in favor of Henderson 3
contention that he had actually resided
on his homestead, the brief says in
part: "Now what does this meant
Does counsel seriously charge that all
the employees of the Hakalau planta-
ton would commit perjury for tho sake
of assisting Henderson in this casef
Since when, in the history of this Ter
ritory, has the mere fact of being a
plantation employee been sufficient
ground for disqualifying witnessf
The probabilities are that the Hakalau
plantation does not have such large
number of houses, but that the planta-
tion officials know who are occupying
them. Does counsel mean to charge by
his innuendo against the plantation en-
ployes that Mr.. Ross, the manager,
the head overseer, and other credible
and decent men would come into court
and deliberately lie in matter of this
kind merely for the purpose of assist
ing Henderson to obtain title to TWEEN
ty-fve acres of land in which they have
no INTEREST,""
Up to Territory.
When the Territory complains that
the evidence regarding the planting
agreement between Henderson and the
plantation, it is complaining at its own
laches, contends the brief. I" If the evil
dence in regard to this phase of the
question:" it says, "is unsatisfactory,
that fault cannot be imputed to the an