The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1886-06-17

had the right to delegate my privi-
lege to Mr.. Dole and he has his
desk all piled up with authorities.
My recollection of one point made
by the Attorney-General and the
hon. member for Lahaina is this,
that the wording of the Constitution
prescribes that man must vote in
his district, and it is the definition
of what "his district" means on
which this bears. The great point
is that because these persons did
not bring their tax receipts, that was
not their district. I defy them TO
bring one line to show that person
must bring his tax receipt to prove
that he has right to vote in that
district. The law is so general that it
covers any man in any part Of the
country so long as he has the quail
fications to vote. The speaker
quoted the law to prove that mans
district might be one thing and his
home another. If he was up in
Makawao, for instance, and paid his
taxes there, he might come back to
Honolulu, where he lived, to vote.
He held that the only law to the
contrary was the opinion sent up by
the Attorney. General to those in.
spectors. Is this house going to sit
quietly down and see the rights Of
voters swept away by the opinion Of
the Attorney-General? Is he to be
legislator and pass laws? That is
precisely what he has done. The
law says these are the qualifications
Of voters. If they have paid their
taxes they have right to vote. II
not they cannot: that is all there is
about it. 1t looks as il the Attor-
ney-General wanted to carry that
election, and that is why he wrote
that opinion.
Minister Neumann asked if the
minority report did not say that his
opinion was correct but not carried
out.
Rep. Thurston said the report
stated that if the Attorney-G Generals
instructions about challenging had
been carried out this point would
not have arisen. The sole idea left
on the minds of the inspectors, after
reading the Attorney-General's OPT
nion, was that if they did not carry
it out they would 60 to prison.
Minister Neumann submitted the
minority report.
Rep. Thurston: l believe the
house has decided not to hear Mr..
Dole or the Attorney General, but
myself. If you have any questions
to ask l will answer them. The
Attorney-General and his supporters
tried to take their rights away from
the voters without any authority of
law. The Attorney-General is leader
of majority in this house, and the
house will likely follow him like
flock of sheep over the Pail. ] be-
lieve it is no use arguing the ques-
tion, but will state what consider
right. 1 do not believe argument
has any more effect on this house
than a dose of salts on craven
image, but l am going to talk to it
all the same. Mr.. Thurston pro-
ceeded to argue that the board Of
inspectors was judicial body, whose
function it was to revise the cleo
toral lists as they came from the tax
officials. They were PORTION Of
the judiciary as much as the judges
of the Supreme Court. In the exer-
else of their judicial functions they
had placed those names ON the list.
What next comes? do not believe
that anything like it was ever heard
of in the world-a letter from the
Attorney-General that unless they
struck those names off they would
be liable to Imprisonment. l say
that was an illegal assumption on
his part. He acted contrary to the
Constitution in doing so. The Con-
stitution says that the judiciary and
the executive shall be distinct. He
was expressly sworn to support the
Constitution when he took office.
And yet against his oath he attempts
to meddle and interfere with the
judiciary, and threatens that If they
will not do so and so they will be
prosecuted. The offense is just as
great in directing those natives in
Kaanapali to change their votes, rs
} if he directed similar injunction to
the Supreme Court. Those inspec-
; tors are part Of the judiciary as
much as judges Of the Supreme
Court, and an infringement of their
rights is an infringement Of the
J rights of the people Of this country.
: I cannot but think that the Attor-
ney-General took advantage Of his
> high position to carry that election.
The Attorney-General said their
| action was based on fraud, and that
: fraud vitiated any judgment; there
fore he had right to order their
| names off. When the Attorney
| General stated that yesterday he
! did not state law or common sense,
, and he knows it. Fraud vitiates il
E it is ascertained in judicial man.
ner. The Attorney-General cannot
set it aside except in judicial man.
p? ner. Precisely the same rules which