The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1886-07-01

any possibility of making the Min
isiers pay for responsibility Of this
kind hc would say make them pay.
But persons who had put their
money into this building had done
! it in good faith, not knowing but the
Ministers had right to do it. In
order to guard against the like of
that in future il would he well TO
put n clause in the Appropriation
Bill that if money is spent without
authority il should be n criminal
ofiense. They should have gone
over to the Palace and got the au.
thority of the Privy Council. A
Cabinet Council was unknown to the
law. 1t was pure fiction.
Minister Gibson said anyone
listening to this debate and the re-
marks of the hon. member for Molo-
kal would think that they were now
discussing an indemnity bill. They
we're not discussing such a bill, but
whether it was right to pay for GER
tain services engaged by Minister
of the Crown. This was not case
of taking money out of the treasury.
They were asking them now for
money. If it was an improper
work, if the building was of faulty
construction or unfit for its purposes,
let the Ministers pay for it. But
Ministers had certain liabilities. res
possibilities and discretions. If
they had done anything wrong in
itself, the house should not sustain
them, but if they had done right in
providing this necessary public work
the house should bear them out.
Ministers had certain risks and res
possibilities, and had many times
come to this Assembly for relief
from those responsibilities. The
hon. gentleman said it would prob
ably be difficult for Ministers to pay
this amount, but it might have been
remarked of many Ministries of the
past that they would have been
bankrupted by the application of
such rule. Look at that Palace,
where Sl47 900 was spent in excess
of the appropriation. Mr.. Arm-
strong, the Minister under whom it
was done, said that if the work had
been stopped short it would have
worked Injury, That satisfied the
ASSEMBLY, because bill OF indem-
nifty was passed Here was noG
single case iu which the present
Ministers, from a fancy Of their
OWN, bad taken money cut of tbe
trensurv. therefore be trusted they
would pass uhis tlem. This was rot
8 question aocGa Ministers ra&Jug
1nmH Qqd ef the trsaSl1ry, but
whether lla work was uscesSarv &ni
suiha,a1s1 fl, dns azaaae1 charged
5n IL,
4 Rsp Brown WIS In tsror ot pass
inn Tins iieEn IS asked hy the Min
lister. ,bui ST i.Iie same tigle he could
4 moi say 1hat be thought the Min
listers had done right in contracting
50 large ! sum Of money without
\ knowing first where it was to come
4 from. They had incurred the debt,
/ the work was finished, and they
trusted to the Legislature to get the
money. This was not the only debt
they had contracted in this way.
BY a rough calculation he found
total of 1920 contracted in the
Interior Department III the same
manner. They were debts of which
the Minister of Foreign Affairs had
given a statement, and were not for
the two years to come but for the
last two years. If this was to go
on what would become of the next
period? If the Legislature had to
appropriate money every session to
pay back debts, they would never
get out of debt.
Rep. Dickey said the Minister of
Foreign Affairs stated they were not
putting their hands in the treasury,
but contracting debts for them to
pass. Yet the Minister of Interior
paid out $6,S9S.70 during the last
period which had not been paid into
the treasury at all. Therefore the
Ministry were morally liable just as
much as if they took the money out.
Rep. Thurston said that was an
important statement, and he wished
to ask the Minister of Interior if it
was true.
Minister Gulick presumed the
hon. member for Makawao reported
it correctly.
Rep. Dole supposed the Minister
of Interior did that honestly, but he
did wrong, and that was piece of
very loose management. If that
kind of practice was winked at, it
was apt to develop into very serious
proportions. He had been rather
amused at the arguments of several
members of the Opposition. They
had used very strong language
l against this appropriation, yet
they said they would vote for it.
If thing was wrong it was wrong.
, He thought the opposition had bet
ter leave the responsibility Of pass
t ing this item on the Government
, party and keep their record clean,
This building was said to be a neces-
sity, and it was something very fine.
1 AT the same time it was not due to
e an emergency of war, pestilence, oil