The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1868-04-04

sm IL have ieiayci Ill uos 10 rai-y a ioubs
which. whatever Ia. Dcui- may b.. yoa o. yoaI
rcaicrs may juiEr. Finding. oonirsry 10 my expect
alton. that no notsce Whatever had TEN taken q u,
AMI eonsiloTing It. II substantial and uphsll by rA-
son. 20 L. % Importance. inasmuch as IL involves 4
clause Of the Constitution, I resolved 10 ehailcrgc thc
right which certain members duly elected 10 Psriia.
ment have TO sii. a. the clause upon which their eli5
blty hinges seems plainly TO d~isqualiiy them
Whether il he ussse, or custom, or law versus
common sense which will allow them ;o sii, / am not
anxio.r, teven If Prepared) TO discuss bu; would
merely state. as they arise in my mind, the most
prominent objections, without wishing to carp ; but
,ao,- sor the purpose Of eliciting information, and as
a query more than argument in favor OF a fixed idea,
I would wish to submit this ATtieic Gl Of the Con-
~stitution reads thus:
per~on shall b. eligible for Representative Of the r-opse
who i insane OF an idei nor unh-- he y = Hiae sgi5eet q the
Kingdom. ~ho shah have arrived Al the fun age of twenty-a--
ye~rs-sho shall kn"" how 70 rad anil ~Hte-Sho SHAH un-
d-rstADd aecOunts-and ~ho shall have bsen dOniehed In the
ioa.- &C.
This article, in n common sense point of view I'M
aided by the technicalities Of law, plainly excludes
those who have been a6ssEf from hs RTagiO@ lrihia
The year imMsiiaieiy preceding their election. In
conversation, / have heard il argued that in such
cases as are here alluded to, the parties being absent,
yet having left behind them all the representatives If
their interests and property, and having been long
residents here, were not considered as absentees,
having already been domicilei more than the re-
quirei '' three years"
To donieiie means TO reside permanently in any
place, with the Intention, when absent, Of returning.
II the construction, n above stated, can be main
tsinei as reasonable, any person having resided in
the Kingdom out oas day and having in that time
taken the cath Of allegiance, may absent himself
until the very last day Of the three years which has
INTERVIEWED between the day Of election and the day
Of his naturalization, when If elected to membership
is allowed tO st.
Again, what need Of the proviso, that the last year
Of his dcmicilation, shall DC the year in mediafeIy pre-
eedins his election, If il applies in all cases, whether
in or out Of the Kingdom for if out Of the Kingdom
never mind how far distant, being yet domiciled in the
Kingdom, the third year Of his domicilatiOn can
reach him no where else but i'm the Kingdom. Any
other construction than the literal expression seems
absurd. as Il involves numerous points OF dispute,
and would expose Partially or lack Of comprehension
in the interpreters Of the law, or else incapacity in
the trainers Of IL.
Again. IL the clause Is not applicable in its literal
meaning To thOse who have been long resident in
the Kingdom, TO trhoa. then, is If aPpiieH5ie3 In
the event Of a person leaving the Kingdom who has
resided here already twenty years, but with the evil
dent intention to return we regard him rs yet
"a dOmiciled,'' and consequently yet eligible as a
Representative. Why not extend the same reason
ing, and allow the same privilege TO one who has re
sided here only ten years, aud IL to him, why not to
one who has resided only FIVE years, since there is
no Law relating TO time in the qualification other than
that alluded to in the clause quoted above and con-
sequently If not applicable in one case, not so in an
other. And IL il applies not in either Of the above
cases, I would ask where is the necessity Ofthe clause,
II it applies to none but these who have beea domi-
ciled no longer than the exact time required by law,
being three years-as the last year Of his dOInicila-
must be the yeaT Of completion Of the required
timcl INQUIRER
REuARKs.-Our correspondent has raised a nice
question for discussion. We We're aware that
The subject was one susceptible of argument, but
the present Constitution rs the ConstItu-
law of the land de TqetO rather than de jure,
We have RETAINED from entering on its discussion,
until the question might be raised by other part
If IL is thought best To test it, as proposed
by our correspondent, and decide whether a per-
il eligible to tine office of Representative who
ms been absent from the Kingdom the year pre-
;cding the election, another question must come
ip in connection with it, viz the eligibility of
to sit n n noble who has lived in the
Kingdom less than the term prescribed by the
Indeed, the whole subject of Leg
%slative eligibility will be opened for discussion.
The Constitution of 1852 (Article 10 provides
hat any person should be eligible to the Office of
representative " who shall have resided in the
for at least one year Immediately pre-
his election" The substitution of the
A.. Is..I.l . -, H. .... e.
: resided |" in the old was evidently made TO re-
move n doubt and to enable subjects who had
'ecn absent during the year preceding an election
% be eligible but whether it does ~ or not, in
of law, remains to be decided by the proper
whenever referred to it, We are not
ware that the question of doInicil, as involved
IA this subject, Las ever been brought up either
n the Legislature or before the Supreme Court.
The other point involved in the discussion is
he right of a foreigner who has resided here lcss
han five years, 10 ait asa Noble in the Legislative
Article IS Of the Constitution of 1864
tys 1" No person shall bs appointed IL Noble
yhO shall not have attained the age Of 81 years,
nj resided in The Kingdom five years"
Article AZ SAYS: 80 The Ministers shall hold
sT otiaO. "a Mobiles, in the Legislative As
II was doubtless the intention. in Article IS.
D forbid tine appointment ofany Minister or Noble
'hO had resided in the Kingdom less than fire
sars. \ strict constituting Of this article would
xelude Mr. Phillips FROM the Assembly, in
he same way that n similar ruling of Article
/, would exclude Messrs. Rhodes, Knudsen and
We should regret to zee either Of these
excluded from his seat in the Assembly
ilely on account of i~ncligibility, and yet if the
w applies to and excludes one. we can not see
ow, with the same fairness in the decision,
iihcr Of the others can remain.
Tho truth il IN. Constellation or 1854 j. the