The Hawaiian gazette., 1890-09-09


/ For building foundations
20 electric light station IS 2,O47 90
>. For repairing Palace gates 1000 90
) For damages for failure
to carry out contract to
return certain South Sea
Islanders. 1929 90
Making a total or .... $4S, 322 90
The basis OF the claims is that full
value was rendered to the Government
Tor these sums; that the orders to per-
form the services claimed for were
legally given by persons legally author
lied 10 bind the Government, and that
the "late Minister of the Interior" had
Illegally and unjustly refused to pay the
claims.
The claims were very properly referred
10 a committee TO investigate.
! DO not wish 10 charge the committee
with willful misrepresentation or sup
preston OF evidence on the contrary, l
wish to expressly disclaim any such i'm
putation, as their failure 10 correctly
report 10 the House may well have
arisen from lack of knowledge of the
facts, and the lack of time to spare from
their duties in the House; but from
whatever cause 1t is no less true that
4 material facts concerning each and every
claim are either misstated, misrepre-
sented, or wholly lacking in the COM
mittee's report.
As the report of the committee is an
imputatiOn that | in my official capacity
unfairly and unjustly refused the pay
ment of legal claims, and the facts
stated by the committee appear on their
face TO in a measure sustain some of
their conclusions, in justicel to myself
and In defence of the taxpayers of the
country take this method of correcting
and experimenting the facts stated by
the committee.
TIE PALACE ELECTRIC LIGHT FOUNDATION.
A CLAIM FOR 81 ,6l2, AND INTEREST.
The statements made by the commit
tee concerning this item are:
l. That this work was ordered to be
done by i. Aholo, Minister of Interior.
> That the charge was a reasonable
one.
8. That the bill was presented to L. A.
Thnrston, Minister of the Interior, who
refused TO approve it.
1. That such refusal was on the ground
that there was no appropriation from
which 10 pay it, and that the Palace did
not belong to the Government, but was
the private property of His Majesty.
,. That the Palace is Government
property, which the committee gravely
proceeds TO prove by citing official evil
dence.
6. That there was an appropriation
from which the appropriation could have
have been paid, VIZ: Lighting City OF
Honolulu with electric light
:. That as proof positive that such APP
preparation was available for that pur
pose, said L. a. Thurston had approved
q bill and paid for the cement used in
this same Job.
On this statement they recommend
payment Of the whole claim.
! desire TO state:
First-That the fourth allegation made
lyv the committee, that l refused to pay
the claim on the ground that "the Palace
did not belong to the Government, but
was the private property OF his MaJes-
", is such a bald absurdity, after $780,
600 and upwards of the peoples money
4 have been expended in building it, that
Il would seem too much Tor even Ha-
waiian politician to swallow without In
vestigation or inquiry; but the commit
tees digestion was equal to 1t. As mat
Ter OF fact this is a totally unfounded
statement. NJ SUN lCtacOh wac SANOh w
could have been gwen by any sane man.
Second - That the committee has
failed to report to the Legislature the
following material facts;
ID That the electric light plant for
which this foundation was made, includ-
ing the dynamo and appurtenances, the
boiler and the engine, was at the time
the foundations were built, and is now,
the private property Of the King, He
bought Ii on his own accounts paid for il
with his own money, with the exception
OF the boiler. which his trustees are pay.
ING Tor IN snstallmenjS as funds are
availables has derived a private revenue
from Il bv renting out lights TO the Hotel,
and has negotiated TO sell il TO The Gov
eminent. There has never been any
,,la;n OF prctense that the entire plant
was not the Kings private property,
=. The committee have failed 20 I'M
s,4an the Legislature that the reason why !
Nfr Nowlcr's claim was refused was hos
cause it Was for constructing n toundas !
zion ion the Kings private property IN |
which the Government had no financial |
interest and 10 which it had no claim,
$50 The committee further failed 10 |
t,,port that another reason why l refused /
to pay the claim from the appropriation |
Tor Lighting the NltN ol Honolulu WIN |
Electric lights. was that in addition TO |
the fact OF the plant being the private |
property of tho King, the lighting of the |
Palace was not the object intended 10y |
the Legislature when they made that APP |
propriation. They intended it for the |
lighting of the streets of the city, and the |
lighting of the Palace was no more prop |
erly chargeablc 90 this appropriation |
than would the laying ont OF walks and |
drives on the Kings private lana or in |
the Palace yard be properly chargeable TO |
the appropriation FOR Streets OF Homo /
lulu
Roth of Che above reasons were stated |
hy me I'M writing 10 Nh Bowler, which |
letter. on the lctterprcss copy thereof IN /
the Interior Department. were available /
for the Information of the committee.
A.' Tho committee have further failed /
TO report TO the Legislature that Mr. Bow