Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1915-08-20
WRITEHOUSE ON
STAND TELLS OF
CITY ROAD WORK
B. C. Brown Injunction Suit
Brings Out Facts About Keep
ing Streets in Condition

~
A movement to have threshed out
the question of what does, and what
does not, constitute maintenance and
repairs in road work was begun this
morning when the case OF Raymond G..
Brown, acting for citizens and taxpay-
ers of Manoa, against the city and
county Of Honolulu, the supervisors.
ct al, suit for Injunction. went to
trial in Circuit Judge Stuart's court.
The complaint fled by Mr.. Brown
was that certain road work which was
being done in Honolulu was in excess
of maintenance and repairs; that it
was practically reconstruction and in
violation Of those sections of the re-
yised laws covering the repair and
maintenance of roads.
A temporary injunction issued by
Circuit Judge Stuart stopped work
which was being done on that portion
of Queen street from the Nuuanu
stream to the prison road; the APP
proach to the Hackfeld wharf. and a
portion of Beretania street running
west from the intersection OF Bere-
tania and King streets, In Moiliili.
L. NJ. Whitehouse, city and county
engineer. and one Of the respondents,
was the first witness called by the
petitioners counsel On the Queen
street portion, he said, the road was
scarified to its original level and filled
to different depths. The average
depth of the filling was about six.
tenths of foot. he said, while the
largest depth was about eight-tenths
Of foot. The latter depth, he testi-
fed, was on the middle line of the
road.
He testified further that the grade
of the road was made to conform with
the level established by the grade
commission
As to the work on the approach TO
Pier 16 the road had no established
grade, Mr. Whitehouse continued, so
the work was done in such a way as
to secure a level in conformity with
Queen street at one end and the rail-
road tracks at the other. This road
was composed of old macadann, he
said. There was no coral in it. It
was full of ruts and holes, but the CEN
ter was not lower than the edges, he
added.
Would it have been possible to fill
in the holes leyeling make a pass
able road without scarifying?' asked
the petitioners attorney.
mo, It would not. answered Mr..
Whitehouse.
"This had tosbe done to make the
road efficientgs
Yes efficient and passable. If the
holes had been simply filled, the road
would not have lasted more than a
week or two
AS to the work on Beretania, Mr..
Whitehouse said that this road sec
ton had been filled with quarry waste.
and then rolled until it became com.
pact.
Mr.. Whitehouse was examined to
some extent by J.. w Cathcart. attor-.
ney for the respondents. Speaking
of the Queen street road, the engi-
neer said it had been constructed in
1904, and that the soil underneath
was adobe mui, which probably had
been pumped in from the harbor.
Asked If the street had settled, he
replied
Yes, it had settled. All the roads
along the waterfront are settling.
He said that the surface of the road
had been worn into hollows and ruts.
After the foundation had been laid,
the whole was covered with asphaltum
as binder. Before, he said, the
1ol br,,.r,1
Mr. Whitehouse testified that he
had been directed by the board of
supervisors to carry out the work
which has been since enjoined, and
that he understood it was to be mere
ly repair work.
The next witness was John w. Caid-
well, former superintendent of public
work and former road oyerseer. He,
testified that in 1912 the portion of
the Queen street road from the Nuu-
anu stream to the prison road had
been repaired by the city and county.
At that time, he testified, It was full
of ruts and hollows, some of them be
ing Is inches deep. The road was
placed in condition, he added, by fill
ing up the holes.
Gould this road have been repair
ed in 1915 as it was in 1922" asked
the attorney for the petitioner.
Counsel for. the respondents object
ed on the ground that the matter of
maintenance and repairs, or their ex-
cess, was legal point which the
court would have to decide. Counsel
for the petitioner argued that he had
o Giohf fn show whether IL would |