The Hawaiian gazette., 1890-04-15

SIR: In replying to the question sub
mitted by YOU on behalf OF the Cabinet
to the Justices of the Supreme Court we
will first set forth at large your letter.
''The Cabinet respectfully request your
opinion upon the following question:
STATEMENT OF FACTS.
s'In accordance with Chapter % of the
LAWS of 1885, the commissioned officers
of the Hawaiian Volunteers twice NOM
mated Mr.. V. V. Ashford for the office Of
Colonel of the Hawaiian Volunteers.
THAT such nominations were disap-
proved OF by majority of the Cabinet.
I'm accordance with the powers con-
ferred upon the Cabinet by said Act, the
| Cabinet on the 2Sth OF March, 1890, pre-
sented to His Majesty for signature, a
commission appointing Mr.. ii. +. Heb
bard to the position of Colonel of the
| Hawaiian Volunteers;
THAT thereupon three OF the members
of the Cabinet advised His Majesty to
sign such commission;
THAT His Majesty thereupon replied
to the Cabinet that i have decided that
| cannot adopt any recommendation
made by Ny Ministers unless they are a
unit in advising the same and
declined to sign such commission.
THAT one member OF the Cabinet
claims that the position taken by His
| Majesty is correct and lawful.
THAT the other three members OF the
| Cabinet claim that the position taken by
| His Majesty involves the assertion OF a
principle subversive OF Responsible Con-
stitutional Government, as 1t would en-
able one member of the Cabinet TO abso-
lutely control its policy and action while
leaving the responsibility upon the entire
Cabinet.
"The majority of the Cabinet therefore
claim that, wherever by the Constitution
or Laws, the Cabinet is obliged 10 take
! action, or the King is required to act
U,y5n the advice of the Cabinet, the
Aaning of such Constitution or Statute
requirement is, that the King shall act
upon the advice of majority OF the
Cabinet, or that majority of the Cab.
met shall decide and govern the action
to be taken by the Cabinet.
''oUEsTIoS.
"Do the various Statutes and Consti-
tutional provisions, referring 70 action to
be taken by the Cabinet, and requiring
the King to act upon the advice of the
| Cabinet, require that such action or such
| advice should be by all the members OF
| the Cabinet, or is it sufficient that such
action be taken or advice given by a
majority of the Cabinet?"
| The question in this letter involves an
4 80 ~ .1lnuSaS ms nafInr1 1G Of
the Act OF 1855 ''relating 10 the military
| forces of the Kingdom" which provides
that "a majority of the Cabinet" having
disapproved of the nomination made for
q Colonel of Volunteers, the Minister of
Foreign Affairs may with "the approval
of the Cabinet" present the name OF an
| other competent person to His Majesty.
What is required or intended by the
word cabinet ?" Is it something diff
ferent from majority of the Cabinet ?''
We find in some other statutes OF the
session of 1888 examples OF the use of
these terms: thus in Section l OF Chap.
| 65 it is said 1.-The Minister of the Interior
with the concurrence OF majority of the
Cabinet" hereafter designated 4" the
| Government, is authorized to enter into
| certain contracts respecting ramie. In
Section OF Chapter % it is provided
that the location, etc, OF railroads ''shall
be submitted 10 the Cabinet for their APP
prevail, and such approval shall be certi
| fed by the signatures of a majority, of
the members OF the Cabinet" while in
Section l of this Ac. the Minister of ne
Interior is authorized to do an act "by
and with the consent OF the Cabinet. ="
The same phrase is used in Chapter 16,
Chapter 90, Chapter 81 and in Chapter
II. In Chapter it is with the approval
of the Cabinet" In one case only do
we find it expressed that the action of
the Cabinet must be unanimous, in
Chapter IL, Section 1.-The Minister of
the Interior with the unanimous concur
renee of the Cabinet is hereby author
ized' to contract for certain inter-island
cable telegraph.
The first two quotations may be con-
sidered to be legislative definitions of
what may be the Cabinet for the pur-
pose of an act Of the Cabinet, viz: that
the majority is the Cabinet, and the last
quotation expresses the exception when
it is intended that the four members of
the Cabinet must concur: the sole ex-
ception that We have found in these
statutes.
In the Constitution a Cabinet of four
members is provided for by Article Al
In Articles q, 81, AZ, 75 and so is pre-
scribed what the Cabinet" NAV or
shall do. In Article 50 the phrase Cab
met Council' is also twice employed.
In only one article are the members Of
the Cabinet treated Individually, in Arti-
Gle Is, which prescribes that money shall
not be drawn from the Treasury without
legislative appropriation except in the
event OF certain emergencies, and then
mot without the concurrence OF all the
Cabinet and Of majority Of the whole
Privy Council"
Our view to be drawn from these cita-
tons is that the action OF the Cabinet is
designed to be as body and not as indi-
viduals. The individuality of the MEM
bers is merged in the Cabinet or Cabinet
Council.
The political theory OF a government
having a responsible Ministry is that
the members composing the Ministry
entertain harmonious views respecting
the general policy on which the Govern
ment shall be conducted and respecting
all important measures. We must look,
II We seek for precedenfs outside OF our
own country, to Great Britain.