Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1914-07-11
SHINGLES STATEMENT TO HOUSE
MEMBERS URGES Federal bldg.


and he explained the object of his
visit-that it was to select site for
the federal postofflce building. In
mediately there were about IA SITES
presented to him, and Mr.. Taylor, the
assistant secretary, said that the
United States government wanted
only one site, and he suggested that
they all vote fer first and second
choices. The Mahuka site received
IS per cent Of all the votes cast for
first choice, and received the unani-
nous vote Tor second choice Mr..
Taylor then entered into an agre"
ment with the Warehouse Trust 90.
representing these people, TO sell Tie
site TO the government. The people who
own this site did not want to sell it
that is, they would sell il to the gov.
eminent, because the Improvement
would enhance their adjoining proper
ties, but they would not sell it to any
private Individual, because it was val
liable property. They sold that prop
erty for little over 81 square foot.
After we entered into that st1pula-
ton, Secretary Cortelyou wrote let
ter under date of April 2, 1907, and
said that before he would acquire
that site he would insist that this
street, so feet wide, be opened and
decided to the Territory This was
along one long block. We secured
subscriptions from the citizens of
Honolulu for $4,000 and paid for that
strip and decided it to the Territory
for 81. The action of the treasury
department to abandon this site and
take another site has brought me to
Washington to see if could get the
Secretary to deed the site back for
the benefit of the original owners and
street contributors. The secretary
said that If they would dedicate this
street to the government for 81 he
would acquire this site for the fed.
eral building. These people believed
that the location of federal. building
there would naturally enhance the
property around it which they owned,
and they were therefore willing to
make the sacrifice.
Now, If the government does not
put the federal building there they
thought that there was probably at
least a moral claim on the govern
ment to return that
Mr.. Austin.-You are going to give
us back our money. are you?
Mr.. Shingle.-Yes; give you back
your money.
Mr.. Austin.--And give us the inter-
est on the money?
Mr.. Shingle.-In tie matter of in
terest we felt this way, that we had
contributed this street for $35, 1000, and
talked II over with the treasury de-
partment, and we went right back to
what would happen if the street had
been condemned under our territorial
statutes. and the government would
have to buy under the condemnation
proceedings n
Mr.. Austin.-Do the attorney-gen-
eral, the acknowledgement, and all
the government officials want this
change made? i
Mr.. Shingle-Yes. ..--
Mr.. Austin.-What is your official
position? s F.
Mr.. Shingle.-My position is presi-
dent of the Waterhouse Trust Co.,
who originally sold this tract for the
various owners.
Mr. Sumners.-What is that prop
erty worth now?
Mr.. Shingle-I Should say that the
property is worth 81 per square foot.
which would be in the neighborhood
OF 100000 The government paid
100000 for it. If you add $4,000 to
that for the street it would make the
property stand the original owners
s1S9000 or $4,000: but, as / said
originally, you or could not have
purchased that property from these
people, but they were willing to sell
II to the government in order to get
the building located there. F..
Mr.. Sumners.-Will that street not
be benefit to that property? Does
not the interest of the property in
there demand that street anyhow?
Mr.. Shingle-Yes.
Mr.. Sumners.-f the interests of
the local property demand that street
there, why should the federal govern
ment, as against the local government
bear the expense of that street, or
surrender the interest. in view of the
fact that we have given them
Mr. Single (interposing. -The
only way could answer that would
be that we went into the deal with
the government in good faith, feeling
that the treasury department no
doubt ....: .
Mr.. Summers got that part of
your statement. -. =.
Mr.. Shingle.-Yes; and if we had
thought they were not going to put
the building on the property we would
have had the property condemned
Our statutes provide that if 40 or
more taxpayers or property owners
petition the superintendent of public
works for the opening of street. the
property is condemned, the value is
fixed. and one-half is borne by the ad-
joining property owners and the other
$50 per cent is paid by the territory;