The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1884-01-09
THE MANDAMUs CASE.
supreme Court OF the Hawaiian Islands
Snoctal Term of Dceember. 1ss3-

AunremG toufh " ~
spectal Term Of Deeember- lss3.
In the matter Of the application Of Wm- r. Castle
,r5 o.hcrs Tor = Writ Of Mandamus to be direct
e1toHf. TroslleBey John N. Karena, Minister
Of Finance.
,,- ,ppr,r ZION oHIET-JUsTIcE TUDD N cHANBLI's'
,o,i4ion Of The Court By MeCaIy, J.
-v., ,+.itionefs set forth that they are citizens
NJ tsxp.yers Of the Kingdom; that the! are n
S,e5 and believe that the respondent IN his Of
ssI eanacitv has prepared and is nov about to
80 bonds 10 the amount Of One hundred ana
Thirty Thousand Dollars purPortlng 70 pe puI-
raut to the Act Of August 9th, 1881 iaAlhs m
avulent therefor silver coins which arc only ABOUT
ifehtv-two per cent Of the value Of United states
ID coin. whereas it is prescribed by the statute
fhat they shall be issued not below par IN tni.ee
states gold coin or Its equivalent Ihai oy lne
rroposed issue the petitioners, a. ciiAenA anu ,aA
isyers would be injured; that thes hANe maui ~
demand which the respondent has REUSED " mere
49, ,-a-r r.etitiouers pray that WI; Of mandat-
NJ do Issue out Of this Honorable Court requiring
nc ssid Minister Of Finance to accept Tor SAID
bond, only United States gold coin or rs equlNa'
Ient and not to accept therefor the silver CONS
.saressis and not to issue such bonds except for
tbeir mar value in United States gold coin or It's
e1uivaient and for further relief etc.
The return and answer Of the respondent deny
5 tho su4iciency in law and neglect q duty etc''
that le d ABOUT 70 AH1lAI u1AlAA' 80 tLiN
~ Al the interest stated, and IN accordance Win
he Act referred to by the petitioners denies MAJ
his intended issue Is below par, and a'els '.,4t ~
i about to issue the bonds al par deios ln-. y
i Lis duty to issue said bonds Only upon IS.Ps "a
their eauivalent value in United states 5oiq com
5,; tIat he intends to receive or accept therefor
coins Of les value than the equivalent o. tie law
ful money Of Tins Kingdom ana 10y siAe iiuilSAtl
ayers that he is 10 receive Tor SAID Dohds SILVER
LIN in bslf-doIla- pieces OF equal weight ana INC
- - T-,itel states silver coin OF the same
,.1rs and lawful money OF the Government OF the
Hawaiian Islands; and denies that he has refused
anv lawful demand.
""r = evident that II the respondent were about
"a make legal issue Of bonds, the petitioners
.a,Id obtain no order Of the Court in restraint
thereof. The Act referred to- which Is Chap. AAlA
a the Session Laws Of lss2, provides by section
First q follows;
Il ~ Eirs, in Cabinet Council. /, hereby author
81 N borrow on the credit OF the Hawaiian Gov
rryneut from time 90 time during the period Of
three wears after the passage oi TINS ACT sno sums
not exceeding in the whole TIE sum OF "o siiIiloh
D,Uars for the purposes IN tins ACT hereinafter
-, Erth Tor which sums the Minister VI Finance
NAV fause coupon bonds TO be issued from umo 10
time for such amounts each as be may deem adTls-
abIr such bonds % be Issued at not less than par
and TO bear tercst not exceeding SIX per cent per
annum. payable seIni-annually, and said bonds to
he exempt from any Government tax whatsoever
and 10 b. reeCmable IN not less than i've nor more
than twcnty-iyg years, the principal and interest
being payable in United States gold coin or Its
equivalent
tlat tLe intezled issue would be Illegal, because
issued al less than par. They aver that the silver
coins which the respondent admits he VIII receive
are worth only about cighty-tvo per cent o! the
ysue Of United States gold COIN and the respond
ont does not DENY this in bis answer, and comedies
in argument that such is the relative ntrinsic
value of these silver coins. The bonds are payable,
principal and interest, in United States gold coin
an its equivalent. What is their par yaluet
Par is the Latin word for equal II has been
adonted into the English Language, and continues
% have the same meaning and no other. Webster :
Dictionary in illustrating its meaning, says: Bills
Of Exchange are at pa, above par. OF below par.
BIils are at par when they arc sold at their nomi-
nal amount for coin its equivalent Bowler 5
Latin Dictionary uses the same terms.
Now. the nominal value, the value expressed IN
these bonds and their coupons is - dollars,
United States gold or its equivalent When such
bonds are issued or sold for the amount expressed
in them paid in United States gold or its equiya-
lent arc they sold above par? And if they are sold
for any sums Of money, not being the same amount
in speL gold or its equivalent they sold at par
or below par? These questions answer themselves
but il is not putting the case too strongly to say
that eighty-two per cent. Of gold dollar Is not
equal OF par to a gold dollar although the eighty
tvo-per-cent. coin may be usage or legal tender
stat1tc circulate at a valuation Of one hundred
cents.
The statute under which these bonds may be IS
sued determines the standard for their payment,
irrespective Of any other statute regulating cur
rency, and their par value Is the amount named
in each bond in such expressed standard coin.
The question Of the par value Of bonds was con-
sidered in the case Of The state Of Illinois vs.
Delafeld, s Paige, $40 and the same, by appeal
to the Court Of Errors, in ? Hill l5g, where the
decree Of the Chancellor was affirmed Bonds Of
the state, issued for the purpose Of making
canal and by the statUte required to be sold at not
less than par were sold by the defendant credit
whereby the purchasers received interest for a
term before The State received payment This was
held 70 be sale at less than par, although 1t was
shown that ;his allowance Of interest was neces-
sarv to make up the cost Of exchange in making
the payment from New York TO Illinois. Bronson,
J. IN delivering the opinion q the Court Of Errors
SAYS:
The bonds were not to be sold at their market
value, if less than the nominal sum secured by
them. They were six per ceAt. bonds in all mar
kets, and the Commissioners were forbidden by
their power-the statutes Of Illinois-to sell them
at less than their par value. This can, ! think
mean nothing else than pound for pound or dollar
for dollar
After quoting the Illustration above taken from
Webster, the learned Judge continues;
1t is . question about par value, and if that
does not mean in this case dollar in money for
every dollar Of security, the wit Of man cannot
tell Us what il does mean.
1t viii be noticed thai the case at bar resembles
in sundry particulars the case above stated. Our
Act provides for loan for certain purposes, which
are specified and what amounts from the lean may
be applied 10 each If the loan shall be made. The
authority 10 the Minister is an authority to issue
at not less than par. Our bonds are to be six per
cent. bonds in al markets, and payable in United
States gold coin. The language Of the Court is a
full reply to the argument made for the respond
emit, that construction Of the Act TO require that
these bonds be sold at par in United States gold
its equivalent would defeat the statute and there
fore, 10 effectuate the statute for loan, it must
be construed so that a loan can be made; and that
as United States gold or its equivalent cannot be
got for the bonds something Of less value must 10
taken The Minister Of Finance is not held to Sc
cure the sale Of the bonds. II is only his duty
when directed by the King in Cabinet Council to
make the Loan TO offer il upon the terms and with
the limitations prescribed by the statute, the sole
authority for the bonds II they cannot be placed
accordingly, the loan fails.
In this view, the Minister, in issuing the bonds
below par, about 10 do illegal act. No
doubt loss and injury would accrue to the coun-
try thereby AID TO every taxpayer and tie ques-
tion raised whether the petitioners can resort to
this Court to protect themselves.
Ii Is said, for the respondent, that as the petit
TONERS suffer no special and private injury they
cannot claim Z standing in Court, There is au-
thority for this position. Under some circum-
stances, il would be for the Attorney General or
officer occupying an analogous position, to bring
proceedings. In some cases, private parties, NOV
ing proceedings for mandamus or injunction, bring
IL IN the name oil the ATTORNEY -Gereral, and per
mission to do so is accorded as u course.
Merrill Plainfeld, 4j n. H. I26 NAV be cited
one Of the cases supporting the right Of indi-
viduals TO bring action in public matter; the
Court saying that the town by vote undertook
TO appropriate money in 4 manner unauthorized
by law, any person who lis a taxpayer in town, and
liable 70 be assessed for any part Of such sum- may
properly interfere 10 prevent its payment and mis-
application, and granted perpetual injunction
The principal objection to permitting suits to be
brought by private taxpayers IS said 10 he, the
annoyance to public officers by a multiplicity Of
suits. The answer 70 this as well As the doctrine
IN such cases, is set forth in recent case in the
supreme Court Of the United States CHAMPION
vs.. Zabrislle, l0I L. S Reports. heard in 1879. We
quote the languago of Nj. Justice Field, at large:
'of the right Of resident taxpayers to invoke he
interposition Of Court Of Equity TO prevent an
illegal disposition Of the moneys Of the county or