Hawaii Artifact dispute question? NEW UPDATE Page 5 - General Tiki

GT Geeky Tiki Member Las vegas Joined: Oct 15, 2002 Posts: 533	GT Geeky Tiki Posted posted on Sat, Apr 17, 2004 4:03 PM Quote: "The Bishop Estate would have a fiduciary duty for the benefit of creators of the trust - the Hawiian people -- even at the expense of everyone else. Consequently, the museum, by virtue of the governing principles of its own trust, would have to relinquish the antiquities, bones, tikis, etc." Wouldn't a fiduciary responsibility argue for displaying the artifacts and adding value to the trust rather than shoving them back into some cave? Fiduciarialy speaking, the descendants of the natives would stand to gain from exploitation rather than reverence. No?

Quote:

"The Bishop Estate would have a fiduciary duty for the benefit of creators of the trust - the Hawiian people -- even at the expense of everyone else. Consequently, the museum, by virtue of the governing principles of its own trust, would have to relinquish the antiquities, bones, tikis, etc."

Wouldn't a fiduciary responsibility argue for displaying the artifacts and adding value to the trust rather than shoving them back into some cave?

Fiduciarialy speaking, the descendants of the natives would stand to gain from exploitation rather than reverence. No?

Post #86793 by Geeky Tiki on Sat, Apr 17, 2004 4:03 PM