Newspaper Page Text
New koI hj Late Arrivals
FEOM SAH FRANCISCO,
KEW YOEK & ENGLAND.
Received by Castle & Cooke
AfiBO. TO ARRIVE BY VESSELS DDE FROM ABOVE PORTS, AND
To we KoiD atLOWEST II AXBS
Suitable for Piantations,Country Stores
OrFAIILIttS. flrters PflM at SliortiM Notice and-with
to Purchar. Atlfiilioii is Called to Our
Improved Paris PL O "W
OVLY tKMirE IAK10 rtJUtl. MADE or FOLlMlbP .AKT bTEEL. and tfnarsD.rttl
1M tf mi aVttrc.tiuu. auj tJ Bwakius J'W in tb Market Alo,otfaer make of
I -Jaw BaftiflT Moif"Io C .John Ilrrre Co.,t Gam-Plow.
. f.Srrt Jr. Mtknlvrt of bwt ttrtrl lo oar kUt , rianteiV Hera, , 1 , 2 and 3; Srjnh
ASP W FlCfc MwWKa. I Wk, miCAur, v inu in huu'( pinwid rrra Vllim,
Htt. wtttixfc Wlanat. India Unlfer How. S. If 1. 11. lfc andSlDch: Ox Token,
. -. j ...1. .. tiMkldi leWaw VhvIc 1 f!anal BAMnKa
I, '"" - ---
. .... !- ML.
- U.I.L fc.u I..L1. I . I t .
aV'ial. Uutar aw4 lcr. India Moan rack! up. rwa&rf arl ooat, all yf ;
a n-- t'wrtr:' aim -$ -. Mara tny OU- Itrd. tiitf tI q lindr . Foot Oi I
CELEBRATE!) SAWS AND FILES. ALL SIZES;
r 4mA " raw: MIV File. Uaairn for
i"at. !'. -
Latest Improvements in Shelf Hardware
" "- ! UHi a: Wr Law Italrr: Wait cam) feed Load. Ztuc I'aint ir, nil
fcUfcr Malaf !nuf - feu FL lrrtatio
IVtavi ni rrCH m uuvniim awanfi.
STA JPIjEI IO JEfST Gr O O ID S
,, o s , A A ; A 4 B JtlrKlied and OWankcd Ct. Ilnwli Dlpr.
cim Irtw4 IMItaTLtlHV Ntiratlnir. Wo,.,nii.. Uir rt, mar im! burM FUiineT.
sTPl: (jRCERIKS, (nildon
mjtaj U cwMr. Pailw ! AIj ! foriiii t inn I'ortliidf! nil llytlrantlt IVmi nt.
For Kofnaoio OU We Offer TELE PALACE, and Guarante
it cannot be beat fox quality or price; also, THE
"VDXCAN. a srood oil and above test:
W000WHRD BROWN'S CELEBRATED PIANOS
III i t .(.!:. i'i V H;in li Ora.m ( .') l'arlur Organs
W. Dukes & Son,
FOR PIPES AND CIGARETTES
BEST 11 THE HARtCE'
"".. I trr t - I'f "f '
STEia CkWFKTOY!,,uriJttU !
ffC MA CKSCTKU
A IflSW TACTOXT & BAKERY
k sc n -.! k1i i if-
aad a niiT. ,
Gkdast Pure Candies
.. 'I. Iw.- liftW hit l't lint i"
VaoMa Chocwiate Creams,
Kk af?U, te ban
Sacar Itou twl Almonds
raCalff natniTRS srat varifltv :
CuM Drop, and
Cu Fruit Bon Bon ;
am aont cue or tw fwsi mm
:,J "i; ?.ntw,,"""","",
MIKGC PIES always fresJi
Tfanka.VanW Vinno Voef
r tiki's itiT ir Ui- '.ni'
I K r:
It. ( ' ' A !'.,
. .. 11..TM M
,,,..... ,. ,,.,..-.
' iPWrt 'Statute 'iwf m
H. M few .& Co
Deotat No. 77 King St.,
- roi the ali o
HAT inn) grain
i I A AM fci.I '
teod for Fowls, Etc.,
'"ill i I ll lnk' l M . ,,' ,!,
i .; i.v. i .- .
: k w :, ."-i - ,
unra naun ricjiiit vinp:. jg t" H lUCD :
MarhitiifU, & Horrlioc.
Mim rm,a: aiif. vai Hon Male Sbo
.'ai)il Varcoai Fd?b, wu Talent
Gate, Slar d'. Superfine Flour
(- Bflffgfi & jq
- Till. IOI.I.oiw.m;
fwl IJiTj flTT rt TlTTVTnTTI
n.jq.i ijojcj ;
WMcli will be Sold at
LOW RATES !
" Electric Oil "
IMS W1TEHHIMTF PATENT Xmilr (..
LARD, in 5 & 10 lb. PAILS
ls hahm:!. ami casis
!& Casks for Family Use.
! CARD MATCHES
Fairbanks Platform Scales,
A.SSOU1XI. MW ,
ASHttASi.S. 1G. 17, IS i't
A Choice Selection of
New Slyles of OarriajMs,
L HAMD CARTS.
i EASTERN MADE OX CARTS
C. BREWER it COMPANY
! BENSON, SMITH & Co.
113 and 115 Port Street,
LEI ALOHA BOQUET.
WEDNESDAY, APBIL 8 1865
Supreme Conrt of the HwlUn Ilnd
M. S. GlUMUUM ASD M. Lonssos,
thepibm or M.S. GmsitACM &
Gomfaxy, vs. Tue IIeeia SroAn
Co., C. M. Cooke, IT. JUcrAimiKE
& Co. akd Alkxasdkh Ksskehv.
Btfn CtmxctiHr Jtfii.
(1) The trill cUi forth tlit tlio plaintiffs on
the 16lU wVusnsl 1663, took a ortEe from
the HeeiSugrrianUtion Company
estibliJlicd under tho lw of the State
of California, upon all the property constituting
the Heeia Sagar Plantation, to secure the
repavment of SC0.000, in the three year, with
interest semi-annnally: and. that 00,000 and
more have been advanced by plaintiffd to carry
on the plantation; (2) that the
inteiest (2000,) due on tho 10th February
1S51 has not been paid; (3) that eaid mortgage
purported to be subject to tho three following
mortgages, (first) frum J. JlcKeague and
Alexander Kennedy to II. HacUeld & Co,
dated Sept, 30 1670, and now by successive
assignments held by C. JI". Cooke, defendant,
(second) from J. McKeague and Alexander
Kennedy to II. Micfarlane & Co, defendants,
dated July 1 16S1, (third) a mortgage from
J. McKeague to Alexander Kennedy dated
Sept. 2! 1SS1; (4) that plaintiffe are infoimcd
and believe that the last mortgage mentioned
was collusive and fraudulent, &c; (j)thatatthe
date of the execution of tho mortgage to II.
Macfarlanc & Co, McKeague and Kennedy
were paitners and plaintiffs cannot ascertain
if there has ever been a legal dissolution of
said partnership; that Kennedy's last place
of abode in this island was at Heeia but Mr.
S. M. Damon is his attorney in fact:
(6) That said mortgage from McKeague and
Kennedy to II. Macfarlanc & Co, was only to
secure tho debt doe to II. Macfarlane & Co,
and for moneys advanced by them. (7) That
tho said mortgage was, among other property,
upon tho lease of the Ahupuaa or IIeeia from
C. It Bishop and wife to John McKeague. and
by a subsequent agreement dated October 1
1660, extended for the period of 13 years additional
to October 1 1691. Tnat after tho
date of tho morlgago lo II. Macfarlano & Co.,
and before the date of mortgage to plaintiffs,
the lease aforesaid was cancelled with the
knowlodgo and consent of II. Macfarlane &
Co, by a written agreement dated February
I 15S3 and recorded; that a new lease of the
Ahupuaa of Heeia was executed to the IIeeia
Plantation Company dated Janu.uy 29 IbS3,
for the term of 22 years commencing October
1 1662, and that thereby II. Macfarlane & Co,
lust the security of said leasehold of the land
I The bill prays, for an account of what is
due plaintiffs, principal and interest, ou their
2. That in default of payment tho IIeeia
Plantation Company may bo foreclose
of their equity of redemption in the mortgaged
3. That all said mortgages mar be mar
shalled in tho order of their priority and an
account taken ot what is due on each.
4. That the mortgage to Kennedy may bo
decreed to be fraudulent and oid.
5. That said II. Macfarlane & Co, have no
lien or security upon the said luaeo of the
Ahupuaa of llccia.
6. That said mortgage of II. Macfarlano &
Co, is a valid security ouly lo the extent of
moncj s advanced by II. Macfarlanc & Co, to
said John McKeague and Alexander Kennedy.
7. And for process aud general relief.
The bill is dated July 3 1681. On tho 23
July, John McKeague by his guardian T. A.
Lloyd was made parly defendaut to this
iction, ou the ground that by a decree of this
Court in a former case McKeaguo is entitled
to a certain equity in the property involved in
Tho defendant C. M. Cooke submits to such
order of tho Court as may be made.
The defendaut Kennedy 6ays that he dissolved
his copartnership with McKeaguo at
ho time of his sale to him of his interest in
.ho plantation for 51,500,' and that the
inortgago iu question wai given him to secure
!art of tho purchase meney and was not intended
as a fraud upon any one; that tho
leeia Sugar Plantation Company purchased
he premises from McKeague wUh lull know-edge
of respondent's mortgage and assumed
payment of samo and that plaintiffs had full
knowledge ot said mortgage before makinc
ai y advances and took their mortgage subject
to respondent's mortgage, and plaintiffs have
made payment ofono note of 5000, secured
by said mortgage and as to other matters they
are cither denied or the respondent has no
knowledge of them.
George W. Macfarlanc and Hcnrv IE. Mac
farlane of the firm of G. V. Macfarlane & Co,
make answer and say they are wrongly
as II. Macfarlanc & Co; that they arc
ignorant of the matters set forth in the 1st
and 2d allegations of the bill: and that the
mortgage made by McKeague and Kennedy
to 11. Macfarlanc was by him assigned to G.
V. Macfarlano & Co, on the 1st dav of Au
gust A. D. 1651: that tho moneys advanced
by them, lo secure which the mortgago was
given, wcro made to carry on tho plantation
of McKeague and Kennedy, and that advances
were so made until Kennedy sold to McKeague
and thereafter II. Macfarlano continued to
make advances to McKeaguo and acted as his
agent until 1st August ls51 when II.
transferred tho agency and assigned the
mortgage to G. W. Macfarlane & Co. of which
firm II. Macfarlano was and is a partner; and
that G. V. Macfarlane & Co, continued to
advance money under the mortgago to
lo carry on the plantation until the
30th June 1SS2, ou which day McKeague
UICIII CUjUao.Bl oi which MUjUOU is
secured by the said mortgage and is now due
and owing with interest: that on the 1st July
1662, ihe plantation having passed into the
poBscesiin of tho Heeia Sugar Plantation Company,
a new account wai opened with it and
ic8Hiudenls advanced money to the company
lo carry on the plantation until 1663
when it amounted to $13,603.15, over and
above the amount of S40.000 secured by the
inurtgac and that this amount wjh paid to
respondents by the said company on Ihe transfer
of the agency to the plaintiffs. They admit
that their said mortgago includes tho assignment
of a lease by C. K. Uishop and wife to
McKeague aud that afterwards they made a
now lease to tho Heeia Sugar Company, but
they deny that the first lease to McKeague
has ever been cancelled or that they ever consented
to the compilation thereof and ther say
that the IIeeia Sunar Company had no nowo'r
or authority lo cancel Ihe lease, &c.
ino nrai question raised is whether the
morlgago dated July 1 16S1 to II. Maefar1n
& Co, covers and is secured upon the Ica60
u, mo .uuiuaa ui jiccia. un we isi uctober
1609 tho owners of this land Mrs.C. It. Bishop
and her husband had by an instrument in
writing and recorded in Book 29 folios 205
and 2(i extended to John McKeague tholeaso
of Heeia for a term of thirteen years from tho
isi uciouer ibsi. lins lease would not by
its terms cxpiro until October 1 1691.
mortgacc recites tins lease in ilm
schedule of property mortgaged. But after
uie iieeiaaugari'laulationUonipany of California
had purchased the plantation from
McKeague, a new lease was obtained by it for
twenty-two years from the 1st October 1682
at an increased rental. This lease is dated
the 2tuh January 1653.
It was admitted by counsel for resjKjn'dents
lhat this new lease is not within tho Macfarlane
mortgage. But is contended lhat as
Macfailane paid the increase rent under the
new lease, and as the cancellation of the lease
covered by his mortgige is on record, he was
bound by the notice thus acquired and it
amounts to a consent and ratification of the
whole transaction. The evidence shows that
Macfailaue did not know of the cancellation
the old lease or the making of the new
lease at tho time they were executed, bnt
heard of them afterwards. I think lhat
payment of rent on tho new lease is
not to bo taken as a consent that he should
loe his security on the old lease. He paid
this rent as agent of the plantation and as ono
of its ordinary disbursements, not as
in iiossession. Tho title of the lessee was
in him by way mortgage and he did not
sign the agreement of cancellation which
would be necessary to divest him of title. In
the ilecrce of foreclosure the Macfarlane mortgage
is to be held to cover the old lease of
I66 ami it renewal of the 1st October 1609,
but not fhe new lease of January 29, 1653.
The next point and one of more difficulty is
irlicil.er Ihe advances made by II. Macfarlane
& C. to John MeKeacue after Kennedy sold
out or to the Heeia Sugar Plantation Company
after their purchase from McKeaguo as "well
as advances made by G. W. Macfarlane & Co.,
subsequent to the transfer of the agency to
that firm, are covered by the mortgage to II.
Macfarlane & Co.
II. Macfailane testifies that the account and
agency of the plantation was on August 1,
1661, transferred to G. W. Macfarlane & Co.,
of which firm he became a member "July 1,
1831: also that, though the date of the assignment
of Ihe mortgage appears to be "1st day of
Augusi 1651." it was in fact executed on tho
21. t day of July ISS3 and the dale in tho ii
ftranient wascbauged to "1st day of August
16S1." This also appears by an inspection
of ihe instrument. It was recorded after this
suit wai. begun.
Xo question is made as to the assignability
of Ib'e Macfarlane mortgage. It runs in the
habendum clause to the mortgagee H. Macfarlane
"doing business as II. Macfarlane & ci,
their heirs, executor, administrators and assign-."
- ".- .ecjfeuvu uuui mc ib uay OI
July 1653, several days alter Ihe execution of
the mortgage lo Mesais. Grinbaum & Co. the
This -view is further sustained by an
ment dated 20th August 1683 between Henry
Macfarlane & Co- and the Heeia Plantation
Sugar Company, by which Macfarlanorelcascs
tho company a, "grantee of tho mortgagor
Mc Keague'from certain obligations in the
raorfgage as to consigning the sngars to him
and waives the breaches of condition thereby;
extends the time of payment of the mortgago
to 20th August 1 55 1, and covenants that no
demand shall be made until that day; that
previous breaches of covenant aud condition
are waived; that the company agreed to pay
tho amount of the mortgagee debt fixed at
$10,000 in ono year from date. This instrument
is signed and acknowledged by Henry
Macfarlane of II. Macfarlane & Co., and indicates
that at that late date II, Macfarlano and
not G- VT Macfarlane & Co. exercised ownership
of this mortgage.
As regards advances made under it to
after Kennedy sold out to the IIeeia
Sugar Plantation Company I think that advances
made to the original mortgagor and lo
his successors in the title arc properly covered
by the mortgage. The mortgagee might
raise the question whether the mortgage not
so stipulating, he was compelled to advance
money to carry on a plantation after It
was sold to parlies in whom he had no confidence.
But the money having been advanced
to Ihe grantee by tho mortgagor and expended
in carrying on ihe plantation, I think equity
would not allow a subsequent mortgagee taking
his mortgago from the grantee of the original
mortgagor to question this.and in tho face
of the agreement of tho 20th August I5S3,
made, as I understand it, at the instance of
Grinbaum & Co., who then assumed the
agency of tho plantation and paid Macfarlanc
the excess of tho debt ovcrSlO.000 amounting
The validity under the statute of frauds of
the parole assignment of tho mortgago is not
properly in question in this case. Bui a
a case decided in this Court somo years ago
(II. Hackfeld & Co. vs. Akina) holds that
tho parole assignment of a mortgage of real estate
accompanied by endorsement of mortgage
noto and delivery of mortgage deed is not invalid
by our statute of frauds which omits an
important section of the original act of
The question is not whether G IV. Macfarlane
& Co. can forccloso tho mortgage for monoy
advanced by U. .Macfarlanc, tho subsequent
assignment dated .luly -1st 18S3 would mako
the right clear. The real question is whether
the mortgage is security fur such advances as
another firm, of which II. Macfarlane is also a
member succeeding to the agency should
make, and wjicthcr it can be by a
subsequent mortgagee with notice. The law
cited by conusel fur plainliHV with respect to
sureties docs not iu my opinion apply.
The strict rule which rcleaso a surety upon
a deviation from the contract (hi not apply
The money paid out by 0. W. Macfarlano &
Co., was paid out in pursuance of tho
for luturo advances, so I lliiuk that plaintiffs
cannot now question il.
In 1 vol., Jones on Mortgages Sec. 373, tho
author says "If tho mortgage contains enough
to show a contract between tho parties, that it
is to stand as a security to the mortgagee for
such indebtedness as may arise from the future
dealings between the parties, it is sufficient to
put a purchaser or incumbrancer upou inquiry,
and if ho fails to make it ho is not entitled to
protection as a bona fide purchaser." It cannot
be said that Griubanm & Co. did not know
that ,G. W. Macfarlano & Co. had advanced
tho money. They paid this firm through the
llccia Company for tho advances made over
and above the sum secured by tho mortgago
and as junior incumbrancers took their
subject to the Macfarlano mortgage.
Jones Sec. 370 says that "tho agreement
under which advances to a certain amount aro
to be made need not be in writing to be binding
and effectual against subsequent liens."
Jfew Jersey and Pcnn. cases, not accessible.
But the agreement must bo niado
contemporaneous and no subsequent oral agreement
can mako a mortgage to sccuro future
advances effectual in preference to a junior
Truscolt vs. King, G if. V. 1 19 and
Hall vs. Crouse 13 Hun. 557. This last caso
is authority that "parolo evidence is admissible
to show that Ihe mortgage was given to
secure future advances to be made by a party
not named in tho mortgage.".
To apply theso principles lo tho caso at bar.
Tho mortgago in question is certainly definito
as to the ainountb to bo advanced, and the
time within which they aro to bo made, and
tho purpose is stated to bo the furnishing and
carrying on of the plantation, and it is lines
lo a subsequent mortgagee whether
the money bo advanced by tho original
or by a firm succeeding to tho agency
of which the original mortgageo is a member.
Certainly neither the mortgagor nor his assigns
could question it and I fail . to see how
the subsequent mortgageo conld havo any
greater equity. Ho took his mortgago with
kuowlcdgo of tho amount for which the prior
mortgage was given and it is no injury to him
that tho money was advanced by persons not
parties to the original mjrtgagc.
I know of no principlo of law or equity
upon which ho can be allowed to tako advantage
of such a fact. He who seeks equity
must do equity. In Joslyn vs. AVyman 5 Allen
02, it was not held that "although a mortgage
cannot, by oral agreement, bo continued
in force as security for a new indebtedness not
embraced within the terms of its condition,
yet, if such an agreement has been made, and
money has been advanced in consequence
thereof by tho mortgagee to the mortgagor, a
Court of .Equity will not did the latter, or onq
who has taken a conveyance from him in a
knowledge of tho facts, in obtaining a rcleaso
or discharge the mortgago for tho mortgagee."
Tho Court say it would bo contrary to equity
to allow this as it is iu direct violation of his
oral agreement. See also a similar case, Stone
vs. Lane 10 Allen 71 and the Conrt hero say
that a Court if Equity will not assist any person
to deprive the mortgagee of- any security
ho would have against tho mortgagor unless
the equitable right of such person is distinct
from and superior to that of the mortgagor;
citing 2 Story Eq. Jur. Sec. 1033 X. 3. Sco
also Crafts vs. Crrfts, 13 Gray 300.
The caso of Taylor vs. Post, 37 Hun 110 is
apparently opposed lo this view. It decides
thai a raurtgago to secure futuro advances is
valid for that purpose only to tho original
firm which was Mortgagee and it could not
by parol be made to cover or stand security
for now indebtedness to a successor to tho
firm. But this was a bill of foreclosure by
the mortgagee's administrator and docs not effect
tho question whether a junior mortgageo
can take this position.
I think that plaintifls having full kuowlcdgo
that a large proportion of tho sums advanced
under the II. Macfarlanc &Co. mortgage, was
advanced by G. V. Macfarlane & Co., equity
will not permit them to disputo the same.
As regards the Kennedy mortgage, it will
be governed by the findings of fact and of law
as made by mo in the caso of John McKeaguo
by his guardian T. A. Lloyd vs. Kennedy
filed this day.
A decree of foreclosure in accordance with
law and the principles hero enunciated will
be signed ou presentation, and -a reference is
hereby ordered to a Master to ascertain tho
amounts due on the several mortgages.
A.S. Hartwell and W.H.Austin for plaintiffs;
F. if. Hatch for defendants, Kennedy
and Macfarlane; W. It. Castlo for Cooke.
Honolulu, March 12, 1665.
Snprcmo Conrt of the Hawaiian Islands
Joh.n McKeoue, llV ins T. A.
Llotd, vs. Alexanlkii Kennedy.
Dtfon Ihe Ctaueelhr. Opinion.
This is a bill in equity to cancel the mortgage
made lo defendant by John McKeague.
Tho essential allegations aro that it appears by
an agreement dated the 11th June, 1875, lhat
plaiutitf and defendant were partners and tint
tho Heeia Sugar Plantation was owned by
them in equal shares; that defendant was then
owing plaiiitifTSlO.OOO, and agreed to pay the
same in mi months, and in default of such
paymont would assign Iu plaintiff ono fourth
of the plantation and of its profits. That on
the 20th February, 1 879, defendant conveyed
to plaintiff, for the consideration of $15,000
one undivided fourth of the plantation, subject
to plaintiffs assumiug a like share of Iho debt
on account of the estate, which then amounted
to over S70.000. Tint on 1st Jul v. 1631.
tiff and defendant made a mortgage to
lauane uo. to secure payment of 520,000
and further advances up. to 10,000 in all.
That at this last date the partnership of plaintiff
and defendant owed 11. Hackfeld & Co., on
account uf the plantation 11,704 70-100, secured
by a mortgage dated 30th September,
1679. That on 21th Senteniber. 1SSI. the de
fendaut sold lo plainlitl his remaining
viueu louriu oi me plantation, for50,000, and
plaintiff gave defendant a mortgage of the
plantation-to secure payment of 51,500, as
evidenced by promissory notes as follows:
2500 in nine taonths.
2300 in twelro months.
5000 iu two years.
10,000 in five vears thereafter, with inter
est thereon at 9 per cent per annum. (This
UMn nf ?hA . . .... 1 C?m nnn
w. v,,vvv hm iurcuaae money, vdu,vuu,
and balance of sale of the first ono fourth,
S4500.) That on the 30th June, 1632, plaintiff
sold the plantation to the Hesia Sugar
Plantation Co., a corporation. That on Ihe
2nd February, ISsI, plaintiff, by bis uardian,
brought a bill in equity against the IIeeia Sugar
Plantation Co and M. Xeisser, ill agent,
which resulted iu a decrco annulling the conveyance
to the corporation, aud declaring it
void on the ground of fraudulent representations
and mental incajucity of the plaintiff.
That at and lun? before the date of the mortgage
lo the defendant (21 September, 1651,)
tho plainliffwas iu a condilion of mental incapacity
for the transaction of important business,
and did not know or comprehend tho
nature and effect of his act in making the
mortgago and notes, and that the consideration
fur the mortgage was grossly disproportion
to the value of Ihe property, and that the
plaintiff was induced lo make tho mortgage by
the suggestion, contrivance and undue influence
of defendant, and by an unfair and dishonest
advantago of the plaintiQ's mental incapacity,
who well knew ihe circumstancs,
and that tho total liabilities assumed by the
plaintiff was then over 570,000, atd which he
was utterly unablo to pay. Tho plaintiff offers
to rcconvey Iho said ono fourth of Iho plantation
to the defendant on his repaying plaintiff
14,000, auduntcrcst received by him from tho
plaintiff, and reimbursing plaintiff hit share of
the expenso and assuming his share of the liabilities.
The defendant's attorney in fact, Samuel il.
Damon, 'answered October 14, 1531, au.l the
defendant, whois a resident of Belfast, Ireland,
also made answer, received here and
filed on Iho 9th February, 1885. These answers
fully detail the business relations of
plaintiff and defendant, showing that in 1659,
plaintiff, who is defendant's nephew, was
started by defendant in business on a small
farm in Xuuanu valley, and McKeague started
a sugar plantation on this farm, and in 15G5,
defendant joined him in it, and a year or two
later they commenced tho Heeia Plantation,
and moved tho machinery thither, amTcirricd
tho plantation on. Xo written articles of
were made, bnt the parties held
equal undivided moitics. In the year 1870,
the parties settled their rights by a deed, and
defendant went to Ireland and" returned in
1671, and went again to Ireland in 1672, and
returned to this Kingdom in 1678. That in
that year the parties made a settlement of their
affairs. That during all this time McKeaguo
had Iho solo management of the plantation and
kept no partnership accounts, and defendant
had no means of knowing whether ho owed
McKeague the 10,000 as claimed by him, hat
that ho took McKcague's word for this and
completed tho transaction 'of the sale of the
first one fourth, as set forth in Iho bill of complaint.
That in 1680 defendant again returned
to Honolulu, and endeavored to sell his remaining
fourth, because, although defendant had
advanced several sums of money from time to
time to carry on tho plantation ho had never
received any dividend or sharo of profits; but
tliat McKeaguo had been drawing out such
moucys as ho required for his personal uro
besides a salary which amounted iu two years
lo about $18,000, for which McKeaguo could
give no' account. That defendant ihcti proposed
to sell his remaining fourth; th it
said ho would givo lime to pay tho h.il
anco of Ihe purchaso monoy, if 10,000 was
paid dun li, and that McKeaguo said ho Amid
not give moro than 50,000 fur iho rem. ining
one-fourth, and that defendant had not mentioned
any prico to him, but subsequently defendant
had told plaintiff ho would take tho
sum offered and the transaction was completed.
The answer avers that tho sum of 50,000 was
a fair and honest price, admits tho payment of
10,000 of tho purcliaeo money and that $10,-000
is owing with over a yoar's interest.
In regard to Iho mental conditioner
the answer admits that McKeaguo
had met with an accident between 1678 and
1680, which' affected his health, aud that in
1650 defendant observed a chango in
mental and bodily condition but lhat
in 1631 McKeague had gono to San Francisco
for a sea voyage aud on his return "he was
decidedly a great deal belter in body and mind,
and was like what ho had formerly been" and
that during all the negotiations McKeaguo
was perfectly cognizant of everything, and
competent to judge for himself. Tho allegations
in 'the bill as to tho mental incapacity,
undue influence, and that the consideration in
tha mortgage is grossly disproportfoncd to Iho
property, etc., aro denied.
Without referring to ihe evidenco in detail,
embracing as it docs much that was taken and
by me fully discussed in the caso of McKeaguo
vs. Xcisscr ct. a., I am of tho opinion that
ilcKcaguc was, at tho time of tho transaction
between bin) and defendant which resulted in
tho mortgago How attacked, in a woak condition
of mind, rendering him incapablo of passing
correct judgment on important business
Tho defendant admits that ho had observed
in 1650 that McKeague was weakened in both
mental aud physical condition, but that in 1631
ho had recovered as tho result of a voyage to
San Francisco and hack.
It is is in evidenco that Dr. Kennedy was iu
I88lf residing at Heeia, where ho held a commission
from the Board of Health: that ho frequently
made remarks about McKciguo's
onco stating, when ho observed
mounting his horse with great difficulty,
that ho seemed to be paralyzed on ono
sido of his body and head, and that if
did not scttlo affaira satisfactorily with
him, lie would have him put into an insar.o
asylum, and get n competent man to manage
the plantation: that Kennedy was dissatisfied
with McKcagucs management of iho plantation,
and even mentipned tho namo of a desirable
successor to tho management.
These witnesses say that the only difference
in McKcaguc'o condition after his return from
San Francisco, was that his complexion was
fairer, lhat his mental condition was unchanged
was as it had been sinco the fall from his
I ninst consider Kennedy as having full opportunities
of judging of McKcaguo's weak"
mental condition and that he, being a physician
of cxpcricnco and having had a long personal
acquaintance with McKoagnc, who was
not only his nephew hut his partner, did have
actual kuowlcdgo of his condition. lie says
he was anxious to close out his interest and
"return to Ireland, because ho could get no dividends
ur profits from tho plantation, lto even
had lo put into the mortgage now under contention,
to be secured, the sum of $1500
of former salo of ono quarter interest.
This McKeaguo had been unable Iu pay him,
and I think this is inconsistent with his answer
and deposition that $50,000 was a fair
and honest prico fur ono quarter of tho plantation
and that tho whole plantation was worth
from $200,000 to $250,000.
But Iho plantation then owed GG,91S.13
and McKeague undertook to boar this in addition
to the 51,500. This would put the
plantation at a valuation of 271,318.13. It
was assessed in 18S1 at 130,310. Olher3
testify that it was worth from 173,000 lo
200,000. Mr. Henry Mac arlanc says that ho
thought at Ihe time lhat the prico McKoaguo
paid was "ridiculous." Tho plantation was
run down, and he told McKeague it was a poor
timo to buy Kennedy out, and udvised him to
let him alone, and used all the arguments ho
could. McKeaguo said ho would not buy but
bought without his knowledge. Ho says that
In June, 16S2, when Boss louk charge, the
plantation was worth aboul $125,000. It is
remarkahlo thai Kennedy was willing in 1879
to sell (thrco years after tho Treaty of
with tho United States went into effect)
at tho rato of 00,000 for the plantation, and
yet ho considers tho prico he obtained two
years later, at a rato of 271,000; was fair and
There is evidenco lhat in tho year 1SS1, all
plantation stocks aud investments wcro high
aud tho prospects of tho sugar interest very
promising. And we havo the evidence tha't
about $200,000 was expended on the place
between April, IS7S, and June, 1831, and uf
this about $100,000 was iu a new mill and
other permanent improvements, and that in
those Vcars all but about $50,000 had been
paid off from tho crops. But it must bo homo
in mind that, though tho mill was new and
good, and the crop at tho timo of McKeagno's
fall from his horse, was a good ono (about
500 tons) ho neglected cultivation after that
and tf.o plantation had run down so lhat it required
great expenditure lo bring it up again
after Captain Boss took iho management.
I think that Kcuucdy was insincere when he
told Mr. Cecil Brown that he did not caro lo
sell lo ilcKcaguc. His answer and deposition
show that be was anxious to get out of a matter
that paid him nothing an.1 burdened him
with liabilities, and I am led by all the facts iu
the case, lo the conclusion that he look au unconscionable
advantage of an enfeebled intellect
to secure for himself a mortgage for an
amount grossly disproportionate to the value
of the property, taking everything iuio consideration.
That McKeaguo was greatly influenced in
consenting lo this bargain by the
allnring and fraudulent representations
of Xcisserl cannot doubt. Of time
Kennedy had tome knowledge, for he
says he told McKeague "lo have nothing lo do
with Jews," when McKeague tolft him he was
going to sell out so a California company for
one million dollars.
In a case decided by mo July 3, 1S91 Apiku
rs. Ftarn, I had occasion to define Ihe principles
upon which equity will interfere where
great advantage is taker of a weak intellect,
to secure an unconscionable bargain with a
grossly disprojiortionate consideration. In
such cases imposition or undue influence will
I find such circumstances in this case and
am of the opinion that Ihe mortgage under
consideration shonld be c Heel led.
A. S. Hartwell ard V. it. Austin lor plaintiff;
F. M. Hatch for defendant.
Honolulu, March 12, 1635.
A now claimwl to be
considerably more'powerfnl than the ordinary
form, has been produced by lions. A.
Iticco, of 1'alermo. Sicily. A long strip of
sheet-iron is rolled around n nnt of soft
iron, oiled imper being placed between the
different layers of the strip to isolate them.
One pole of the battery is connected with
tho nnt, to which the inner end of the iron
strip is soldered, while the other is connected
with the outer end. The passage
nf thn rnrronf Ibrniifrli Ilm clnn ...
tizes not only tho nnt bnt also each layer
of tho iron coil, which plays tho ilonblo
iuie vi cuuuuciuruiiu magnetic snostnnco.
.. oneer j? Line
-- ' "
Arrival of the Iron Ships
and " Clan Grant."
Have Received 1 by these Vessels
And other Late Arrivals,
the Following :
An Asst. of Dry Goods
CONSISTING LV PAKT OF
Uorrock,s Long Cloths and other brands of
White Cottons, Unbleached Cottons,
Prints, now styles, fast colors ;
Bleached and Brown Cottons, 8 lo 10 quarter j
Itrown Linon Drills, Whito Linen Duck,
Crown Canvas, Blk .t Cld French Merinos, all
Grades; Water-proof Tweeds, Grey, Iilne and
A L.USGE ASST. OP DltESS GOODS, SILKS,
Satins, Silk ltibbons, Velvet,
Union and Cotton Listados, Linen and Cotton
Handkerchiefs, Whita and Colored Shirts,
Merino Undershirts and Drawers,
Lidies Undfcrwear, Linen nnd Cottou Towels,
All qualities nnd styles; Victoria Lawns,
White Moleskin, Check Moleskin.
Imit. Iaco Kdgings and Insertions,
Brooks' 200 yds. Spool Cotton, Coates" 100 yds.
Spool Cotton, Ticking, Dine Denims,
Mosquito Netting, 90 inch ;
Rubber Coats & Leggings
All Sizes, Weights, Qualities nnd Colors ;
Velvet & Tapestry,
Rugs and Mats,
A FEW OF THE NEW STYLE,
Merchant Canvas !
Filter Press Bags 22 x 36
Yt'c mako this ono of oar Specialties and
have a Fall Stock of
Sugar, Rice & Coal Bags
Which wo aro selling at Bottom l'riccs.
ENGLISH. HAWAIIAN. AND
3, 5. and 7 yard ;
Ultra Heavy, Assorted Widths :
Ladies' & Gent's Saddles
A complete lino which wo aro selling
Cheaper than liter.
Tea Kettles & Sauce Pans
Assorted Sizes ; do Fry l'ans,
Butcher Knives, Knives & Forks,
Tin Plate, Sheet Lead,
Galvanized Water Pipe, to 2 in.
WHITE LEAD, various qualities;
BOILED OIL, TURPENTINE
21 Gauge, 0. 7, 8 and 3 ft. Lengths; Galr.
Screws anih Washers, Galr. Kidding,
Yellow Sheathing Metal, and Nails
Annealed Fenco Wiro, Fence Staples,
Wiro Flant Guards and Arches,
With Fish Flates, liolts and Spikes,
Fire Clay, Firo Bricks,
Both Square and arch ;
Lump Rock Salt,
3 to 12 inch widths;
AN ASSOUTMENT OF
Worcestersbiro Since, Fruits, Jnma,(?ream Tartar,
Soda, fcj pices, Etc, Etc., Etc.
haTo alw jost received an nsst. of:;
Bleached & Brown Cottons
27 to 30 inches wide ;
Fancy Prints. Blue Denims,
Canton Flannels, Men's, Womens nnd
Children' Hoots and Shoes, sizes and
Styles adapted to this market;
A LAUGE FBESU ASSORTMENT OF
Crockery nnd Glassware, Oos, Picks, Shovels,
Plantation and Mechanics' Tools
4 II-l" snd 0
ONE SPLENDID PIANO,
BY lUtlXSMEAI) X SON.
GorsaRe's Sonp, two qualities, in holes of 21 Bars
and CO Bars;
Best Welsh Steam Coal
COKE, FLOOBLVG TILES,
1OS0 Ac., &c, Ac.
Just Arrived !
P'T"Dakcof Abcrcorn'form LItitdooI,
.TNTO FOR. lSJ2LXyX3il
ONE MILE OF
Light Portable ilailway Hails,
10 lb. per yard, and 3) Inch khhrc with
AND 10. LIGHT SUGAR CANE WAGONS
JfOIi TIIK OAaxiS.
Railway if a ni table for Animal Tower.
ALSO FOR SALE
Straight Sled ItalH, II IIu. to the jnnl
For Ihi. working of Mr: John Kunlrr Jb Co 'n railway
and lornnintiw - ntJflrrirn,d to rtr lo
I.I. Sjftit' ! '.fnr'rk wLrrralloeft
now in fall v rati n
ForfirthT, irni!ir a Mil '
H- I. (-REEN. nr
u jrvFAKHNE A (
104. A F'.wh rA I n
FOR THE COMPLEXION I
THIS KTVEO.VNTT lKKl.UtATIO
X i- Ibt MOST I'I.E: El T BEAlTiriEIt KMIWN.
It Is Parr mod ! "l.'.lul H it Apa!lcati"ti
and w mderfnlfn it E!T rl whll'
fall lo il c arM lir
fl liOU'XAN. CheaM.
CUT FOB SALE 111 Oaklscd.Cal.
101 Hf HOLLISTER & Co.
XriIKUEAS A 1&TK2?T "WAS IS-
V I iced to BiDbory U. Jarrti, yn the 9Hh Jana
irv 13ft. bT the Minister of the Intuit r. under the law
f'thi for a Ga and CineftraibCoaaaiBiBg
Fnrntce. tfai 1 to warn all pttrontifttlatt an
the laid Patent.
C. CREWXR A COMPACT
Agents of the J utI Parnate Co
V r -T O CaCTKR Scc't.
lioDolala, Febnurj J IS2. 113
(Fctif! .il mwtrhstmtiits
) Giuar Stbxst.
BffTw !! hi th rofirT tat-- W. S
g. j?B ran'TH"!.. ... srvKjtr wtd TtJULAznsrr. cam if ? ':
g a xi Vr vyzFis 'ffliLt?' js
I o IllrrravOld norrt.
- ' fl mi xratwl Irom tint sjwin mr iuC ",x cureu sou ,
J UEOUnill? USOIinT.liliwMMn.StmliniLffKM.S.v.iin,. H3
.fWiitniuuo mi p,t,arwMkii Yin., 5ial
nui rim. UBiripnnnii.
r -.-..7.-1 Brtfcw di. iu.
(10iI ,m w ;..W....W.H.
r -V....L.. i.(.i. ut
Kwi& nuu vi.i
-mum- !- MV ortl JSUTOPfaO FhVITUUl
.to: f. lllsopIikioncvunoUilnr.KRl mar mars ratnxs mbw rv vul
shann. TV it toTUit far treatment,
1 i PTidfit that athrnctaii lm eItcs fete whole attMttira t .
hi--r: a.'M attain rtntkUl, nnd pbrvadanathroinhoat
iuvi i"i t, Miumiu ma. irpijimiuy iwoinii'nu aiaicuit aw f
urn pfTiaui,oT woum fwrTKnown stMM
to riL Tne DortnrS As nod Jlxpvriencvmaktt tun
sj'i i mi i nervine inrponanre.
w hi. cnii m no iw ibat th IVieter. Consultation fre
ta. ftmaJe dtiwnansur J
i-ii.- a. inr jmrmrwiLMirowinnniMUWiiiir I
anwti i uui or wnte. Hours: uwiy, rrr.ni j
9 a. r "p m. euHerenln;fkindrIAtniaon:y s. )
M r , i t. o-. i t . BISTUUIDK TO
mo nrivrw, jimum'tij
www, iiivaionum raw wnni
l hw uni iu uwia niiu Happiness
t i i i ip nnifrmrw atmmt im f i
i vw.m,iinHU utj'vaMm WSHM rmrrnKJU&F i
wwi tin AAfAjiiMi ,
i um) t larwnHV HMrMf
i tir (.nmnntrjjunM ITrmr.n1 t BW CMrll ,
Set to BT nlJrm.. co trrd
powerful rerun, hetu fra h
" " p.i.nj. ir IH TTin 1.111 ai M 'I '
UCOIG UMrOHIHY, IB . r C.L
nnu Huucf MMtWRM.ii mu '("HUm
I I U
IHTDIA MICE MILLS
in,.. r ii.. n.. r ..
imnwiMH i m
..-' r" ": B5
mj WHO 53WWT, HIfT aaa -
- - ..-. . . n Hi
rwwv niwi man
ivn rroca oavp uura m oi. .
UXAJ Ju;SKSTfalw AQOxvaS J
uw in 'arte, rnerka tne
irsuxn, awl restores too t
maaiif iiiwaw n ! v
am Jtr rOTrJTOKW .
MuWtkni .Jawtshn. Mast
t ontt. T rr?Ti Ym- '
. ., i.
InjtJnnf, 3Ua tiruiitti Deaawr II
b Km i: niarnt laurriMiina
I W.'rklliiy sian.1 nnrtJlnl. The yield it lhr.
pnndf Pudilr. acrotdiog tuqwitljol Ifc taddi wli..h
II, these late char .mil improvtmeau the
Rates for the Hulling & Cleaning of Paddy.
OT Mlirri.Mi'1'AIlBT TwHAN rKA?(C'lM
at tiii: stx ru.riNi xillk,
un iu: a.mi;i:
7tli lliitlr treiIoM fnttii MliNsaae'll.
often conilaised of lu cleaMfMi k
with tttffar caryo.
A.M) Itptlwr Ratfi a i
of manJn ovrr laliand t Icati'iK i i rS
107, 109 & 111
'pjIKJKUlA KICK Ml M.s, Vl'Tlj;
. '"I?.1, ?.,7.T'1il ""'lr V'l'Ji'""'" "" "iiLM"!
IllslsSStotl Mi.rcl)jiiUI.i.' Ur from lil
ts jtoSprcenl.Kranrlhsa ttia. uf any ')ihr Mil1".
Is enabled to Largely Reduce Ihe
AJIOM: Till: .MAXY AIkVANTACJl
a.m iiwi.vu it i.kam:ii
of Won at tho San "rancUco
Nailiilii lliclrlil ..r Mrrrhantable Kice
of 5 to cent.
.Iril 5n!tiff lit Kitttr for Hulling and Cleaning
Itli l'rrHtiiKH miil l.temir' Iu OnaMty
nth H(il t'lennllitr of Packages
CONSIGNMENTS OF PADDY SOLICITED.
Wm. M. GrKEE.LN "WOOD
GeuernI ComailMion Merehnat aad Proprietor of tk
INDIA RICH MILLS, Sn Tamatcisco, Cvl.
The Greatest Hosiery Sale on Record
AT THE POPULAR MILLINERY HOUSE OF N. S. SACHS.
104 FORT STREET, HONOLULU, H. I.
BIGGEST BARGAINS EVEB OFFERED I
Full Regular SViacle Hose, Al! Sizes
Ami Colore, siiul liuuninteeil to be worth 'A) mill 75 t'entw er
Pair, will olt'er the Entire Lot at the uniloni price oi
" 25 CS3r3'B3?S 3Fj9lX3FL
ALSO--A SPECIAL LOT OF
Ladies' Straw Hats at $1.00
LZJSmmS'F 4f " s viv' r Uflfl ilH&i fi rtlH 9Sr
At tho Old Stand, tfo,
mvuurriiA Dfiajjji iiiuii wynMll
PLUMBING, in all its branches;
Artesian "Well Pipe, all sizes;
I'nole Sani, Medallion, Kichiauud, Tip Top, 1'akico, Flora, May, Cootost, Orand Friz,
New Itiral. Opr. IJerby.Wrra. Dolly, Ctypiiy, joeen, PaswT, A Army Kane, Magna! Ijnrie r. litrt,
Superior, Mngnet, Usoeola, Almeda Eclipse. Charter Oik. Nimble, Inwood and tanndry St.,n,
Galranized Iron nnd Copper Boilers, ior Range.?, Oranite Iron Ware, Nickel Plated ami I'I :m :
Galvanizetf Iron "Water Pipe, all sizes," and laid, on at
Lowest Rates; Cast Iron antl Lead Soil Pipe,
House Furnishing? Goods, all kind;
KUBBEK HUSK-ALL SlZliS ANDiBADBS;
Lift and Force f brtem PampA Garraoized Iron, Sheet Copper, Hbeet lul,
Iad Ilpe, I in Plate, Walr HoreU, Marble Rlabs and Bow la, Ei Ameled Waahndo,
Chandeliers, Lamps, Lanterns
8 Kaahumanu Street,
of the Celebrated
A Large Invoice
Wo Havo Especial FACILITIES for Adjusting TRUSSES.
Hollister & Co.,
Cor. Fort and Mercluuit Sts., & 59 Nunanu St,