Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1914-07-30

report says: ....
Honolulu, T. H., July 90, 1914.
TO the members of the grand Jury.
Gentlemen: The committee ap-
pointed by the foreman of this grand
jury for the purpose of investigating
the relations existing between various
holders of retail liquor licenses and
private individuals beg to submit the
following report: ... H.
In the first place we wish ii under
stood that the evidence and informa-
ton received by the committee has
been most conflicting, and 1t has been
very difficult to arrive at any accur-
ate decision. 49,: F..
The following, however, is what we
believe to be the actual facts: s.. IT,.
in 1910 the liquor commissioners
adopted regulation to the effect that
no wholesale liquor dealers could be
interested In or hold saloon license.
I'VE understand that since that
time each and every one of the indi-
yidual applicants for saloon license
have stated to the liquor commission.
ers that they were the only parties in
terested in the saloon under consid-
Grafton, and the evidence given to this
committee was along the same lines
"As the Pacific Saloon has figured
conspieuously in the controversy We
will consider that first.
prior to 1910 LIE Pacific Saloon was
owned by Messrs. w. c. Peacock &
Co., and the license for same was is
sued in their name. In the early
part of 1910 Messrs. Peacock & Co.
sold this saloon to Mr.. c. G. Bartlett
for the sum of $4,000, and later Mr..
Bartlett sold a half interest In same
to Mr.. Emil Waterman for $4,000.
license Granted to cofnyn.
When application was made to the
liquor commissioners for saloon Ii.
cense, Mr.. Philip F. Cornyn was the
applicant for the Pacific Saloon. The
license was granted to Mr.. Cornyn. and
90 far as the commissioners or the
public knew Mr.. Cornyn was the only
interested party In the saloon.
From July LIST, 1910, until July 1st,
1911, we are led to believe that Mr..
Cornyn was only an employe, working
on a salary.
"On July 1st, 1912, there was a CO.
partnership agreement entered into,
whereby C. G. Bartlett, Emil Water
man and Philip F. Cornyn became
equal owners in the Pacific Saloon.
having each a one-third interest.
"Mr.. Cornyn borrowed the money,
giving the Honolulu Brewery his note
for $709e, with a mortgage on the sa.
loon as security.
This arrangement apparently prov.
ed satisfactory to all concerned. Mr..
Bartlett and Mr.. Waterman receiving
their pro rata of the profits, being
two-thirds OF same, and Mr.. Cornyn
receiving one-third.
"Mr. Cornyn apparently retained $3.50
Eper month for living expenses. the
balance of his share of the profits be.
ing paid to the brewery on account OF
his note. 80;
Upon the payment of this note Mr..
Cornyn held his one-third interest
clear.
sThere can be no doubt but that the
agreement of copartnership was fully
understood by the three interested par
ties, as the terms of same were con.
scientiously lived up to.
"In 1912 Mr.. Cornyn had an oppor.
tunity to purchase the Fashion Saloon,
and sold his interest. in the Pacific
Saloon for that purpose. Mr.. Bartlett
contaminated the sale and sold the
one-third interest to Mr.. Charles
Lynch for $1,000. the brewery lending
Mr.. Lynch the money on his note Sc
cured by a mortgage on the saloon.
ION February, 1912, Mr.. Bartlett
and Mr.. Lynch entered into an agree.
ment whereby. upon the payment OF
the $1,000 note by Mr.. Lynch, he,
Lynch, would then have his one-third
interest In the Pacific Saloon clear
This agreement gives Mr.. Bartlett a
two-thirds interest in the saloon, Mr.
bartlett having, however. private
agreement with Mr.. Emil Waterman,
whereby Waterman still retains one
third interest. This agreement. how.
ever. is without the knowledge OF
Mr.. Lynch.
SECURES Note From Lynch.
about the time the agreement with
Mr.. Lynch is made, Mr.. Bartlett Sc
cures a note from Mr.. Lynch for $1,000,
secured by another mortgage on the
J saloon. This mortgage was not re-
corded. as we are told that the note
did not represent any Of the purchase
price of the saloon. but simply to De
held by Mr.. Bartlett as security IN case
of any slip, and he should not receive
his two-thirds of the profits. He then
could, If he 50 desired, collect on TINS
| second note.
"The agreement between Mr.. Bart
lett as a two-thirds owner and Mr..
I,ynch. owning one-third. was apparent
" fully understood by both parties.
Mr. Lynch's affidavit to the contrary
Notwithstanding, as the conditions OF
same were always adhered to, TO the
effect that two-thirds Of the protits
were paid to Mr. Bartlett, and IN ao'
dition thereto Mr.. Lynch paid Ger.
tain amount from his one-third proilt
to apply to his Indebtedness 10 the
! brewery. -,
ct might be well to state that an
amounts paid by Mr.. Lyncn were oy
check nsyable to the brewery Mr.
RartIett cashing same and distributing
the money in accordance with tne
agreement, he RENTING one.hsh OF
his two-thirds profit to Mr.. Waterman
he being 4 one-third owner as per pr.
IT,