The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1888-04-24
Status of Reform.

EDITOR GAZETTE:-During the in
term between the 3Oth of June and
the election on the 18th of September
many large public meetings were held
TO give expression to the popular feel
ings about the revolutionary action,
the causes that led to it and what
should be done. As expressed at a
large meeting they wanted to elect a
legislature who would vote against
"demagogues, extravaganza, useless
officials, fuss and feathers, log-rolling
legislation, military and naval folly,
foreign mission Yagaries, extra terri
torial dictation, irresponsible admins
tration, an assembly of OfficehOlders,
stealing the peoples direct road taxes
for other purposes, retrOgressiOn to
the old order, with its riotous waste OF
the revenues and shameless debauch-
cry of public life.n
The simple mention of the things
against which the people wished the
legislature to take ground, shows the
character of the abuses from which
they sought deliverance, but they de-
fine more positively that their legisla-
tors shall "vote for reform, RESPONSE
BILE rule, honest government, the new
constitution, internal improvement,
economical administration, indepen-
dence of the kingdom, spending the
peoples money for the benefit of the
people,
These instructions to the legislators
to be chosen are, in harmony with the
platform, admirable, both for brevity,
comprehensiveness and sentiment,
adopted by the reformers, and the uni
form utterances of the mass meeting
of June 30th.
The determination not to stop short
of good government, or an honest at
tempt at it, could not be mistaken,
and the Legislators harmonized with
the people.
The legislature, elected by larger
vote than ever before polled at the
islands, met on the Sd of November.
In pursuance of the purpose to practise
economy and abolish supernumerary
offices, the report of the committee
showed the office of Governor to be
wholly unnecessary and to cost $1l 5000
for salaries, besides incidentals, and re-
commended its abolition. The report
says that many of the duties named
are useless. The committee say "they
are convinced that there are no duties
now incumbent on the Governor
which could not be performed by
others with positive advantage to the
public service" Consequently they
brought in bill abolishing its offices
and distributing its duties. This bill
passed by thirty-siX ayes to ten nays,
November 29th, and on the Both the
house passed a bill, ''to declare the
construction of the word king or sOver-
eign in certain casesn-"when any act
or thing is commanded or permitted to
be done or performed by the king or
sovereign, it shall, unless otherwise
expressed. mean that such act or thing
shall be done and performed by the
sovereign by and with the con-
sent of majority of his cabinet"
On the 9th the King returned the
bill aboIishing the office of the Gov
ernor with his veto, against the adj
vice of his cabinet.
The Legislature declared the veto to
be illegal as it was not endorsed by
the Cabinet and through a committee
returned it to the King, who adhered
to his veto, and referred it to the Su-
preme Court. The Legislature, after
the expiration of the 10 days from its
transmission to the King, declared it
to be the law according to the Consti-
tuition.
The Court invited the members of
the bar to discuss the subject, and
twenty-five lawyers were present and
discussed the subject for five and a
half hours. Ten of the lawyers sus-
tanned the veto, thirteen went against
it, and two were neutral. The Judges
did not decide. The Legislature de
elared it a law by reason of the illegal
veto by % yeas to ii nays, and Is were
absent Had the full House been
there doubtless there would have been
thirty-siX or more yeas, as when the
bill passed, perhaps more, as four were
absent when it passed. The absent
ones were, the Honorables Wilder,
Dowsett, sr., Luhiau, Hitchcock, Ma
kee, Bertelmann, Deacon, Mcguire,
Kauhane, Paris, Daniels, Wahine,
HoTmer-13.
The Legislature had passed the bill
by large majority of those present,
considerably more than two-thirds, %
to II, or "A to II exclusive of Ministers.
There had been passed bill that any
act of the King commanded or per-
mitted, unless otherwise expressed,
evidently in connection with the act
lin their opinion) should be considered
as done with the consent of majority
of the Cabinet. The Ministers advised
the King to sign the bill. He, how
ever, vetoed it. The Legislature then
declared the veto illegal and proclaim
ed the bill the law. The Sheriff of
Maui then sued the Governor under
law for possession of the papers, but
the Supreme Court by four to one sus-
tanned the validity of the veto.
Thus it appears that, including the
Judges, fourteen professional lawyers
sustained the veto and fourteen deemed
it illegal as it was not sustained by
majority of the Cabinet, and in the
.noriSl ,a;,,a4..a,, 49,, Is.,l