A foreign mission board maintaining a school in Hawaii in 1849
turned the school over to the government under an agreement,
expressed in correspondence that the government should maintain it
as an institution for the cultivation of sound literature and solid
science, that no religious tenet or doctrine contrary to those
inculcated by the mission, a summary of which was transmitted in
the correspondence, should be taught, and that in case the
government did not so maintain it, it should pay to the mission
$15,000. After maintaining the school for many years as it had been
maintained under the mission, the government converted it into an
agricultural college, and religion ceased to be a part of the
curriculum. Meanwhile, the Constitution of Hawaii of 1894
prohibited the appropriation of any money for sectarian
institutions.
Held, in an action brought by the Mission to
recover the $15,000, that
Extrinsic evidence, as to what the parties did and the nature of
the course of instruction when the agreement was made, and
thereafter as continued by the government, was admissible to prove
the intent of the parties as to what was meant by sound literature
and solid science, and that, under all the circumstances, the
agreement was that religious instruction was to be continued and,
on the failure of the government to continue such instruction, the
Mission was entitled to recover the $15,000.
The government of Hawaii was not relieved from its contract
obligation by reason of the adoption of the constitutional
prohibition against appropriation for sectarian institutions.
This action was brought in the Supreme Court of the Territory of
Hawaii to recover from the territory the sum of $15,000 as the
alternative of the reconveyance of certain property conveyed by the
American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions in 1849 to the
Hawaiian government, for the nonfulfillment of the conditions upon
which the property was conveyed.
Page 206 U. S. 207
A demurrer was sustained to the petition and thereupon this
appeal was taken.
The following is an outline of the principal facts alleged:
The American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions,
hereinafter called the American Board, for many years prior to
1850, had conducted and maintained a Protestant mission in the
Hawaiian Islands, and, as an essential part of its missionary work,
carried on many schools. Its most notable educational work was
centered in a school established in 1831 at Lahainaluna, on the
Island of Maui, where it possessed a large tract of land. This
school and the premises occupied by it were set off by the chiefs
to the protestant mission in 1835. On the building and other
improvements, many thousands of dollars were expended, and the
school had, in 1850, become a most important factor in the life and
progress of the Hawaiian people, and was recognized as the leading
educational institution in the kingdom.
The course of instruction comprised not only the usual topics
belonging to secular learning, but included also direct religious
teaching and training in the doctrines represented by the mission.
[
Footnote 1]
Page 206 U. S. 208
These facts were established before the board of commissioners
to quiet land titles, to which the claim of the American Board to
Lahainaluna, as an established part of its system, was duly
presented and recognized, and the board of commissioners adjudged
as follows:
"Lahainaluna, part 5, § 2, claim relinquished before the land
commission in consequence of an after-arrangement having been
entered into with the Hawaiian government by the mission. Vol. 3 L.
C. Award, pp. 143
et seq., upon the final confirmation
which was duly made to the said A.B.C.F.M., all the lands claimed
were awarded, 'with the exception of § 2, Lahainaluna, which had
been withdrawn.'"
The "after-arrangement" referred to in the records of the land
commissioners was as follows:
"Because of financial stress, and also feeling that the school,
which had really become a national institution, should be conducted
by the government at its own expense, in April, 1849, the mission
at its general mission held in Honolulu, voted as follows: 'To make
over this seminary to the government, it being understood that it
is to be conducted on the same principles as heretofore.'"
"An offer was thereupon made to the government in pursuance to
this vote of the mission to make over the school to the government
on condition that it should be continued at its expense as an
institution for the cultivation of sound literature and solid
science, and further, that it shall not teach or allow to be taught
any religious tenet or doctrine contrary to those heretofore
inculcated by the mission, a summary of which will be found in the
confession of faith herewith enclosed,
Page 206 U. S. 209
and that, in case of the nonfulfillment or violation of the
conditions upon which this transfer is made by the said government,
the whole property hereby transferred, hereinbefore specified,
together with any additions of improvements, should revert to the
said mission."
This offer as made was not accepted by the government, but it
instead submitted a counter-offer to the mission by which it
offered to take over the school on the conditions made in the
mission's original offer, but
"provided that, in case of the nonfulfillment on the part of
this government of the conditions specified in the letter of the
above-named gentlemen, it shall be optional with this government to
allow the institution, with all additions and improvements which
may have been made upon the premises and all rights and privileges
connected therewith, to revert to the said mission, to be held in
behalf of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions,
or to pay the sum of $15,000; provided also that, in case this
government shall find it expedient to divert this establishment to
other purposes than those of education, it shall be at liberty to
do so, on condition that it sustain an institution of like
character and on similar principles in some other place on the
island, or pay the sum of $15,000 to said mission in behalf of the
Mission Board in Boston."
A more definite form of the "confession of faith" was
substituted and accepted by the government, and the whole
arrangement ratified by the Hawaiian Legislature, Law of 1850 (F.C.
1850) 158, sec. 1 of Civil Code (1859) sec. 783, and by the
prudential committee of the American Board.
The letter of the mission to the Minister of Public Instruction
is inserted in the margin. [
Footnote 2]
Page 206 U. S. 210
The Hawaiian government at once took possession of the
Lahainaluna Seminary and carried on the school exactly as it had
been conducted by the Mission, both in religious instruction and
the inculcation of sound literature and solid science.
For many years after the government had taken over the school,
the principals of the school continued their relations as
missionaries of the American Board in their work in the school, and
continued to make reports of their educational and religious
Page 206 U. S. 211
work and instruction in the school to the general meetings of
the mission.
In 1862, the seminary buildings were burned down. Other
buildings were built. The principal, in his report for that year,
1862-63, reviewing the history of the school, says:
"The Hawaiian government has always been a liberal friend and
benefactor. . . . Never in any way have they interfered with our
manner of instruction, or in the course of instructions
Page 206 U. S. 212
pursued. In our work, we have had all the freedom which we
possibly could have had under the A.B.C.F.M."
Also, referring to pupils who, under the religious instruction
at the school, became ministers, he says: "While six who were
connected with it since it has been under the care of the Hawaiian
government have been ordained to the same office."
Prior to the establishment of the Anglican Church in Hawaii, the
board of education appointed as instructors such persons as were
acceptable to the mission, generally selecting those nominated by
the mission. When the Anglican mission was established, it was
proposed that the forms and probably the substance of religious
instruction should be changed, and advice was asked of the Attorney
General. His reply reviewed the whole arrangement upon which the
government received the seminary, and concluded as follows:
"Should the government not be willing to keep the conditions as
far as I have shown, then the property and improvements must be
restored to the A.B.C.F.M. "
Page 206 U. S. 213
In 1865, the Hawaiian Gazette, the official mouthpiece of the
government, declared that the government had resolved that its
support should be given to schools irrespective of their religious
teaching, but pointed out that the board of education might be
chargeable with partiality for supporting a state church, inasmuch
as it paid large sums to defray the expenses of Lahainaluna, where
the principles and theology of one particular sect were exclusively
taught, although opposed to the belief of all in communion with
Roman Catholic and Episcopal churches.
In the following years, upon the suggestion by the mission of
certain instructors, a correspondence arose between the board of
education and the mission in which the board of education said that
it was understood that the institution was to be continued so as to
aid, instead of to defeat, the purpose for which it had been
founded, and that nothing had been done to justify the intimation
that the board had any desire to defeat such purpose, and
admitted
"that a full compliance with agreement consists in appointing
persons teaching in the doctrine and after the manner of the
Congregational and Presbyterian churches of the United States."
And further:
"The board are fully aware that, if they do not see fit to carry
on the institution according to the terms of the contract, they
have to reconvey it, or pay the sum of $15,000."
After 1865, the seminary continued to be conducted on the same
lines as prior thereto.
In 1894, in the Constitution of the Republic of Hawaii, it was
provided that " . . . No public money shall be appropriated . . .
for the support of (or?) benefit of any sectarian, denominational,
or private school." This provision is continued and remains in full
force as a part of § 55 of the organic act.
Religious instruction ceased to be a part of the curriculum at
Lahainaluna, as provided in the agreement, on or about September 1,
1903, at which date the religious tenets and doctrines, in
accordance with the creed and articles of faith
Page 206 U. S. 214
of the mission, ceased to be taught, and are no longer taught.
The "cultivation of sound literature and solid science" has also
ceased, and the institution has become a technical school under the
name of "The Lahainaluna Agricultural School."
The territory maintains no other institution of like character
and on similar principles in any other place on the island.
The appellants are the successors of the American Board of
Commissioners for Foreign Missions.
Upon these facts, it is alleged, that appellants have become
entitled to a return of the property conveyed or to the payment of
$15,000; that the territory has refused to do either, but has
elected to retain the property, which election is evidenced by its
refusal to pay the said sum, and the further fact that it is
proceeding to erect expensive buildings thereon and expend large
sums of money in fitting the property and the school to become a
technical school -- namely, an agricultural college.
The petition was demurred to upon the grounds substantially as
follows:
1. That the court had no jurisdiction of the subject matter of
the claim. 2. That the United States was a necessary party, the
property described in the petition having been transferred and
ceded to the United States by the treaty of annexation of July 7,
1898. 3. That the petition did not set out facts sufficient to
constitute a cause of action in that, (a) it did not appear that
the agreement set forth in the petition was ratified by the
legislature; (b) that the right of action accrued more than two
years prior to the commencement of the action; (c) it did not
appear that there had been a breach of the conditions of the
agreement; (d) or, if so, that it occurred in compliance with law
and statutes which rendered the fulfillment of the conditions
impossible. 4. That the petition was indefinite and uncertain, in
that the allegations as to breach of conditions pleaded were
conclusions of law, it nowhere appearing in the petition in what
respect the conditions had been broken. The supreme court overruled
the first, second,
Page 206 U. S. 215
and fourth grounds, and divisions
a and
b of
the third ground of demurrer.
Page 206 U. S. 218
MR. JUSTICE McKENNA delivered the opinion of the Court.
The contentions of the parties are sharply in opposition as to
the agreement and the necessity and competency of extrinsic
evidence to explain it. Appellee contends that we are confined to
the letter of the agreement, and, so confined, its conditions have
been fulfilled. In other words, that "sound literature and solid
science" are still cultivated, and that no religious tenet or
doctrine contrary to those heretofore inculcated by the mission is
taught. Or, to express the contention in language other than that
of the agreement, that a school devoted to one subject of secular
science, and which excludes all religious teaching, was
contemplated by or is permitted by the agreement. Opposing these
views, appellants contend that a mere technical school does not
fulfill the agreement; that the terms of the agreement require the
"inculcation of general learning and knowledge," accompanied with
religious instruction in accordance with the confession of faith
submitted to the Hawaiian government. And it is insisted that, if
there is anything
Page 206 U. S. 219
doubtful in the agreement, it may be interpreted by the
circumstances which preceded it and the immediate and long
continued practice under it. If we may resort to those
circumstances and that practice, there cannot be a shade of doubt
as to the intention of the parties. It is insisted, however, by the
appellee that the agreement is clear and unambiguous, and that it
does not present a case for the resort to extrinsic evidence. We
cannot concur with this view. There is quite a range of meaning in
the words "sound literature and solid science." To interpret or
specialize them and make definite application of them would
certainly receive aid from the practice of the parties. It is
contended by appellants that there was a close connection between
them and the "definite system of doctrine" which was the "central
purpose of the mission." We, however, need not dwell further upon
this contention, though a plausible argument has been advanced to
sustain it, and we pass to the next controverted contention. The
words of the agreement are that the government
"shall not teach or allow to be taught any religious tenet or
doctrine contrary to those heretofore inculcated by the mission, a
summary of which will be found in the confession of faith herewith
enclosed. . . ."
Were these words all there was of prohibition and purpose as to
religion? May we believe that it became suddenly the purpose to
change an institution which had had its impulse and foundation in
religious zeal to convert the Hawaiians to Christianity and to
educate young men to be "teachers of religion" to one simply
literary and scientific and nonsectarian? Had the belief of the
mission in its form of Christian faith become so indifferent that
it would transfer a seminary instituted for the propagation of that
faith with no other condition than that contrary tenets should not
be taught? There is not a syllable in this record to justify such
assumptions. It must be remembered that we are considering a
transaction which occurred in the Hawaiian Islands in 1849, and by
the conditions of that time were the acts of the parties induced.
Besides, the agreement is not in a formally executed
Page 206 U. S. 220
paper. It is found in a correspondence, and is constituted and
explained by the whole of the correspondence. And, taking the whole
of it, there is very little aid from extrinsic evidence needed to
demonstrate its meaning and purpose.
The mission reminds the Minister of Public Instruction that the
seminary was established in 1831, "to promote the diffusion of
enlightened literature and Christianity throughout the islands,"
and that it had been unceasingly watched over, cherished, and cared
for by the mission, and that $77,000 had been expended for its
benefit. It was stated that, in consequence of debts incurred "in
the prosecution of its labors of benevolence and mercy," the
American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions was compelled
to diminish its grants to each of the missions under its care,
including the Hawaiian mission, and that the latter, for that
reason, would be "unable to carry forward its operations with the
vigor to be desired in all of its departments of labor." In view of
these facts, it was stated and believed that, under the
circumstances, the transfer of the institution "to the fostering
care and patronage of the government" would "promote the highest
interest of the Hawaiian people." An offer was then made to
transfer the seminary with the conditions which we have referred
to. A confession of faith was enclosed. The government modified the
proposal by reserving the right to pay $15,000 as an alternative to
the reversion of the property to the mission if the government
should not fulfill the conditions of the grant. The modification
was accepted, and, in a subsequent communication, a new confession
of faith was substituted for that originally proposed. The
following are the reasons which were given:
"The reasons for requesting the substitution are that the
previously presented confession, although according in all its
specified doctrines with our belief and with that also of the
churches by whom that institution has been founded and sustained,
is yet not so distinctive as to present a barrier to the
introduction there of other deleterious doctrine not specified
Page 206 U. S. 221
in said confession. It will admit, also, of teachings of this
mission and of the churches sustaining it such as we feel to be
entirely subversive of evangelical Christianity. Not doubting but
that these reasons will commend themselves to the members of his
Majesty's government, we beg leave to express, in presenting them,
the high consideration with which we remain."
The correspondence concerned the transfer of a school
established in 1835, the design of which was to perpetuate the
Christian religion, and with an object described to be "still more
definite and of equal or greater importance" -- that is, "to
educate young men to be Christian ministers." A religious
instruction was prescribed. All this the government was informed of
when the proposition was made to transfer the school to its
"fostering care and patronage." And the government accepted the
grant, accepted as it was tendered, and necessarily for the purpose
it was tendered.
Even if we stopped here, conviction of the justness of that
conclusion is almost indisputable. It becomes indisputable if
extrinsic evidence be considered, and we have no doubt that it may
be. In
Bradley v. W. A. & G. Steam
Packet Co., 13 Pet. 89, a contract expressed in a
correspondence between the parties for the hire of a steamboat, an
exception was ingrafted which was not expressed, upon evidence that
the owner of the boat knew the service for which it was intended,
and that, when navigation was obstructed by ice another mode of
transportation was resorted to. The Court said, as to extrinsic
evidence, it was applied in some cases
"to ascertain the identity of the subject; in others its extent.
In some, to ascertain the meaning of a term, where it had acquired
by use a particular meaning; in others, to ascertain in what sense
it was used where it admitted of several meanings. But, in all, the
purpose was the same. To ascertain by this medium of proof the
intention of the parties where, without the aid of such evidence,
that could not be done, so as to give a just interpretation to the
contract."
And it was expressed "as the just result" of the cases
Page 206 U. S. 222
"that, in giving effect to a written contract by applying it to
its proper subject matter, extrinsic evidence may be admitted to
prove the circumstances under which it was made whenever, without
the aid of such evidence, such application could not be made in the
particular case."
In
Brooklyn Life Insurance Co. v. Dutcher, 95 U. S.
269, it was said: "There is no surer way to find out
what parties meant than to see what they have done." So obvious and
potent a principle hardly needs the repetition it has received. And
equally obvious and potent is a resort to the circumstances and
conditions which preceded a contract. Necessarily in such
circumstances and conditions will be found the inducement to the
contract and a test of its purpose. The conventions of parties may
change such circumstances and conditions or continue them, but it
cannot be separated from them. And this makes the value of
contemporaneous construction. It is valuable to explain a statute
where disinterested judgment is alone invoked and exercised. It is
of greater value to explain a contract where self-interest is quick
to discern the extent of rights or obligations, and never yield
more than the written or spoken word requires.
See, for
further illustration, the following:
Reed v. Merchants' Mutual
Insurance Co., 95 U. S. 23;
District of Columbia v. Gallaher, 124 U.
S. 505;
Topliff v. Topliff, 122 U.
S. 121;
Paige v.
Banks, 13 Wall. 608;
Philadelphia R. Co. v.
Trimble, 10 Wall. 367;
Chicago v.
Sheldon, 9 Wall. 50;
Cavazos v.
Trevino, 6 Wall. 773;
Simpson v. United
States, 199 U. S. 397,
199 U. S. 399;
Chicago Great Western Railway Co. v. Northern Pacific Railway
Co., 101 F. 792. And many state cases could be cited.
The design of studies for the school we have detailed. The
government recognized and continued both without question or change
in any way. The seminary buildings were burned down in 1862. The
government rebuilt them and continued the school. The petition
alleges that the principal of the school, in 1862-63, in his
report, said:
"The Hawaiian government has always been a liberal friend and
benefactor. . . .
Page 206 U. S. 223
Never in any way have they interfered with our manner of
instruction or in the course of instruction pursued. In our work,
we have had all the freedom which we possibly could have had under
the A.B.C.F.M."
Also, referring to pupils who, under the religious instruction
at the school, became ministers, he says: "While six who were
connected with it since it has been under the care of the Hawaiian
government have been ordained to the same office."
In 1864, new interests appeared and a change in the purpose of
the school commenced to be urged. It was met by an adverse opinion
of the Attorney General, who pointed out the conditions of the
transfer and the condition of their nonfulfillment to be the
restoration of the property to the A.B.C.F.M. And again in 1865,
the board of education, while denying the right of the mission to
nominate instructors, conceded the obligation to continue the
institution "so as to aid, instead of defeating, the purpose for
which it was founded," and the alternative to be the surrender of
the property or the payment of $15,000. "Religious instruction," it
is alleged,
"upon the lines formerly pursued by the mission and subsequently
by the government, in accordance with the agreement, was continued
up to or about September 1, 1903."
We hence see that not only the immediate practice of the
government construed the agreement as contended for by appellants,
but the practice of over fifty years proclaimed the same meaning --
proclaimed it without question and against a suggestion and
agitation to reject it. It is somewhat staggering to be told that
such continuity of practice is not a legal interpreter of the
meaning of the parties, and that the only criterion can be a
precise and isolated from of words which, at the end of a half a
century of contrary admission and declaration, one of the parties
finds it convenient to bring forward.
It is no defense that the government's policy has changed. It
cannot so release itself from its engagement. The provision for the
teaching of "sound literature and solid science" might be
considered of "expansive character," to use the
Page 206 U. S. 224
description of Lieber, and change with the progress of both. The
provision for religious teaching is unchanging. It is as definite
and absolute today as it was when it was written. The alternative
of it the agreement has made the return of the property conveyed,
or the payment of $15,000.
Judgment reversed and case remanded, with directions to
proceed in conformity with this opinion.
MR. JUSTICE BREWER took no part in the decision of this
case.
[
Footnote 1]
Laws of the High School, as Amended and Adopted by the Mission,
June, 1835.
"
Chapter I"
"
Design of the School"
"The design of the High School is,"
"1. To aid the mission in accomplishing the great work for which
they were sent hither; that is, to introduce and perpetuate the
religion of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, with all its
accompanying blessings, civil, literary, and religious."
"4. Another object, still more definite and of equal or greater
importance, is, to educate young men of piety and promising
talents, with a view to their becoming assistant teachers of
religion, or fellow laborers with us in disseminating the gospel of
Jesus Christ to their dying fellow men."
"
Chapter VII"
"
Of the Studies of the School"
"4. The whole school shall meet between daylight and sunrise
each week day for prayer at which one of the instructors shall
preside; the roll shall be called, absentees marked and called to
an account at least once a week."
"6. On the afternoons of Tuesdays and Thursdays each week, or at
other times equivalent, the whole school shall meet for biblical
instruction, embracing the interpretation of Scripture, evidence of
Christianity, archaeology, and sacred geography. And Friday
afternoon of each week, or time equivalent, shall be spent in
exhibiting and correcting compositions in the Hawaiian language and
in elocution."
[
Footnote 2]
"
Exhibit A"
"Honolulu, April 25, 1849"
"To His Ex. R. Armstrong, Minister of Public Instruction of the
Hawaiian Islands."
"Sir: The undersigned, a committee of the general meeting of the
mission of the A.B.C.F.M. at the Sandwich Islands, appointed in
reference to the Mission Seminary at Lahainaluna, Maui, beg leave,
through your Excellency, to offer a few remarks respecting that
institution, and make some proposals in reference to it to his
Majesty's government for its consideration."
"It is well known to his Majesty, and also to most of the
members of his government, that, in the year 1831, the mission
commenced the establishment of the institution now known as the
Mission Seminary of Lahainaluna, Maui, to promote the diffusion of
enlightened literature and Christianity throughout the
islands."
"From that period to the present time, this institution has been
unceasingly and anxiously watched over, cherished, and cared for by
the mission. No expense or pains coming within its appropriate
means or power have been spared to promote its usefulness and
secure the objects of its establishment."
"Three missionaries have, for a large portion of the time, been
devoted to its interests, and two at all times since the two or
three first years of its existence. About $77,000.00 have been
expended for its benefit, including the support of the teachers and
the dwellings erected for their accommodation."
"We need not point you to the fruits of this cherished
institution, scattered throughout the islands, filling various
posts of honor, responsibility, and usefulness, both in and out of
the government. They are well known to his Majesty and the officers
of his government, and to none better than yourself."
"The institution has been planted and sustained to the present
time by the American Board of Commissioners of Foreign Missions,
from donations given by the American churches for the spread of the
gospel in heathen lands. That board, as we learn by recent
intelligence, was at the close of its last financial year
embarrassed by a debt of $60,000.00 incurred in the prosecution of
its labors of benevolence and mercy."
"As a consequence of its indebtedness, it has been obliged to
curtail its expenditures by diminishing its grants to each one of
the missions under its care, and this mission, in common with
others, has shared in the general reduction."
"For this reason, the mission will be unable to carry forward
its operations with the vigor to be desired in all of its
departments of labor. Some must almost inevitably suffer for want
of pecuniary means."
"In view of these facts, and believing that, under present
circumstances, the transfer of this institution to the fostering
care and patronage of government will promote the highest interests
of the Hawaiian people, we beg leave, through your Excellency, to
submit to his Majesty's government for its consideration the
following proposals,
viz: "
"That the mission of the A.B.C.F.M. at the Sandwich Islands,
acting for and in behalf of the said American Board of
Commissioners of Foreign Missions, having its headquarters in
Boston, State of Massachusetts, in the United States of America,
relinquish all of their right, title, and interest to and in the
seminary buildings located at Lahainaluna on the island of Maui,
and known as the Mission Seminary, together with all of the
dwelling houses at that station erected by the mission at the
expense of the said A.B.C.F.M., for the use of the teachers in the
said Mission Seminary; also the building erected by the mission as
a printing office and bindery; also all lands pertaining to and
granted for the use of the Missionary Seminary, and also all
philosophical and other apparatus procured for the use of the said
seminary, also the public library of the said institution, and to
transfer the same to the Hawaiian government for its use, benefit,
and behoof, to have and to hold the same forever."
"Providing, however, and this transfer is made upon the express
condition, that the said Hawaiian government agrees that the said
institution shall be continued at its expense, as an institution
for the cultivation of sound literature and solid science; and,
further, that it shall not teach or allow to be taught any
religious tenet or doctrine contrary to those heretofore inculcated
by the mission, which we represent, a summary of which will be
found in the confession of faith herewith enclosed, and in that in
case of the nonfulfillment or violation of the conditions upon
which this transfer is made by the said government, the whole
property hereby transferred, hereinbefore specified, together with
any additions or improvements which may have been made upon the
premises, and all the right and privileges hereby conveyed or
transferred to the Hawaiian government by the said island mission,
shall revert to the said mission, to have and to hold the same for
and in behalf of the American Board of Commissioners of Foreign
Missions."
"These proposals, if accepted, by the Hawaiian government, shall
not have binding force until they shall have received the sanction
of the prudential committee of the American Board Commissioners of
Foreign Missions in Boston, and further, should the said Hawaiian
government accept the proposals here presented, and enter forthwith
upon the fulfillment of the conditions, and should the said
transfer not meet the approbation of the prudential committee, the
mission, on its part, pledges itself to refund to the said
government any necessary expenses it may have incurred in carrying
on the institution whilst the parties were awaiting the
ratification or rejection of this transfer by the said prudential
committee. Provided, however, that moneys shall not have been
expended in enlargement or improvements, other than what may have
been actually necessary to keep the buildings in repair and carry
on the institution."
"In case of disagreement of the parties as to the amount proper
to be refunded, in case of the non-ratification of this conveyance
by the prudential committee, the sum shall be determined by two
arbitrators, one of which shall be chosen by each of the respective
parties, and which arbitrators, in case of disagreement, shall
elect a third to decide upon the award."
"The foregoing remarks and proposals are respectfully submitted
for the consideration of his Majesty's government, and I feel
greatly obliged by an early answer."
"We have the honor to be,"
"Very respectfully, your ex. friends and most obedient
servants,"
"W. P. Alexander"
"C. B. Andrews"
"S. N. Castle,
Com."
"By S. N. Castle"
