Honolulu Republican, Volume IV, Number 496, 14 January 1902 — TOO MUCH! SAYS UNCLE SAM: NOT ENOUGH! SAY SUGAR FOLK [ARTICLE]

TOO MUCH! SAYS UNCLE SAM: NOT ENOUGH! SAY SUGAR FOLK

fury Awards 5105.072 to Honolulu Plantation Pearl City Jury. After Twenty-Three Hours of Deliberation, Returns Sealed Verdict, Giving $89,792 for Leasehold Interest and $15,280 for Improvements.

"To - ' r.ibt :s far beyond a just i m -a 1 Unlt«d States District At ra. i j j Dunn**. when a yerdlct »a.» returned yratndif by the jury in the condemnation suit of th*- Goviriirrl rt against the leasehold inter- » t of the Honolulu Plantation Com pan> In lands at I’<-arl Harbor 'lt is just abont fifty per tent of t hat we ought to have," said Attorney F. M Hatch. |;ot I) Sides ink exceptions to the lerdict anti moved for a new trial Tin Honolulu Plantation Company awarded |los,tM«*» in all, Th" ver>j, t was rendered immediately on top. ning of the Federal Court yes terday morning, being handed in -eaft-d by Marshal Hendry. It wa* 1 i. a hi .1 on Sundav morning after the jry had been out twenty-three hours. Verdict cf the Jury. The verdict is as follows:' Cnited States of America. • District of Hawaii. 'ln the District Court of the United Stat‘ s in and for the District of Hawaii. -The United States of America. Plaintiff and P< tilloner. "The Honolulu Flantation Com- ; anv. a corporation, et ah. defendant and respondent. ■ We the jury in the abov entitled action, upon the issues framed in said action b tween the above-named ! aintiff and petitioner, and the Honolulu Plantation Company, a cor Potation. (!• fendant and respondent ■J. iv. named, find the following ver dirt, to wit: -j. Wo find that the above named plaintiff and petitioner is entitled to lave all the right, title and interest • f said defendant i.t and H> the tracts and parcels of laud involved herein, condemned for the ns. s and purposes f • out ia th • petition on file herein. • n i i., take hold and acquire said

in fee iiraple absolute, for the public uses and purposes in said petition stt out. "2. We find the value of all improvements upon the property condemned In the above entitled action to b‘ »ir*,2S0.00. -3. We find the value of the prop erty condemned in the above entitled action, to wit; the leasehold interest of said defendant, said The Honolulu Plantation Company, a corporation, in and to the tracts and parcels of land condemned herein to lie $S9.T92i»t in United States gold coin. 4. As to that part of the property < ondemm d herein which constitutes only a portion of a larger tract we find and assess the damages which will accrue to the portion not sought to be condemned by reason of its severance from the portion sought to lie comb mned. and the construction of the improve ments in the manner proposed by the above-named plain tiff and petitioner, to lie nothing. “5. As to rbat part of the property condemned herein, which constitut s only a portion of a larger tract we find and assess th? benefits to the portion not sought to be condemned, by the construction of the improvements proposed by said plaintiff and petitioner, to be nothing. "Dated. Honolulu. Hawaii, .Tanu ary 12. 1902. “GEORGE W PAGE. "Foreman of Said Jury." N >tice For New Trial. United States District Attorney Dunne gave notice of a motion for a new trial as soon as the verdict had been read, stating that the Government would file its motion within three days, and < xceptlag to the verdict as contrary to both the evidence and the law. Judge Silliman arose for the defendant oorp ration, also giving notice of a motion for a new trial.

Judge Estee said that whatever was ■ lone ia the matter would have to be done before the closing of the pres--1 « nt term and that the term would end before the beginning of the Hiio term 1 on January 28. The following w re members of the jury returning the above verdict; Charles E Murray. George W. Page. James H. Chas. H. Ramsay. K. B. Porter. Otto Bierbach. E. Buffan deau. W. J. Hickey. C. V. Sturdevant. Captain A. N. Tripp. John J. lacker and M. M. Kohn. A Mere Coincidence. Someone intimated that the jury had contrived to fit the amount of damages in the verdict to Admiral Bradford's alleged announcement that if the Bishop Estate verdict were sustained there would be left $105,000 of the appropriation. This is a mere coincidence as none of the jurymen read the Washington dispatch containing Admiral Bradford's reported remarks until after they had agreed on the verdict, when one of their number drew the attention of the rest to a newspaper clip ping which he had come across and which contained the article above referred to. it was learned that eleven of the jurors agreed on a verdict on Saturday night, one man holding out tin ;il Sunday morning. District Attorney Dunne says that he cannot account for the finding of $15,000 for improvements, as he maintains there are none such on the property. He will make a strong protest against the award for improvements. The award for the leasehold com prising 561.2 acres, of which 342 were < iaimed good for cultivation, is $l6" per acre. The Bishop Estate, in the previous ’ .is", was awarded $75 per acre for th- fee simple of the lands. j j