The Hawaiian gazette., 1893-07-04
OPINION OF rHE COURT BY rREAR, j.

I OPINION Or THE COURT BY TREAR, j..
The prisoner is held by the marshal
/ under warrant Of arreSt issued by the
| district magistrate Of Honolulu, in the
| usual form. commanding the marshal
| 10 srreSt the prisoner and two Others
/ ACCUSED Of the crime OF conspiracy as
| in the foregoing affidavit" The Sffid9-
| Wit is thSt Of +. q. Hitchcock and is in
| the usual form upon the same sheet Of
! PAPER snd lust above the warrant OF
/ arrest, the StfiSnt swearing that the
/ defendant and said Others, naming
/ them, sat said Honolulu within three
months LAST past were guilty Of the
crime Of conspiracy, by malieiOnSly
| Snd reasonably eonSpiring and con-
| eerting together, and conSpiring and
/ concerning with others 70 the affiant
/ unknown 10 overthrow, and put down,
and destroy by force the Provisional
/ Government OF the HSwiian Islands,
and 10 levy war against said Provi-
| Siousl government, Snd TO oppose by
force the Suthority Of and by force TO
seize, take and possess certain prop
! erty Of said government, TO VIII, the
government building, now occupied
/ by the executive council OF said gov
eminent, contrary 10 the authority Of
the same using substantially the
language Of section ), act 5, Of the
/ Provisional government, being an act
s'to amend chapter OF the penal code,
relating TO treason"
Counsel for the prisoner contends
thAt the prisoner should be discharged,
/ because % the executive and 9dvis-
DRY councils Of the Provisional gov
eminent hai no power TO pass sci
prior TO the passage Of set I, which
provided among other things that the
two councils should act Jointly in the
exercise Of general legislative powers;
and [2l set i void under article -
/ Of the constitution Of 1857, which pro-
yides thst ''eyery law shall embrace
but one object, and that shall be eN-
pressed in its title, insSmueh as the
title OF set relates TO treason only,
while section relates 10 conspiracy,
and sections 8 znd to other OtfenseS;
and g. because the warrant does not
set forth with sufficient Particularly
the offeuse for which the defendant
wSS arrested.
The first of these points Is res ad-
Judfcata- This court has held that
the executive aud advisory councils
possess general legislative power by
virtue Of the proclamation OF January
L., 1885, and not by virtue OF aet I. In
re Sheldon, decided March 81, 1898;
Provisional government -. Herring,
decided June =, 1885
As TO the second point, the reason
for requiring that every law shall
embrace but one object, and that
shall be expressed in its title,n is, as
expressed in Article - itself of the
Constitution, sstO avoid improper in
fiueuees which may result from inter
mixing in one and the same act, such
things IS have no proper relation to
each other The improper results TO
be avoided are, principally, ''hOdge
podge,r or "Iog-rOllingr legislation,
surprise or fraud upon the legisla-
ture, and eoneealment Of the subjects
Of legislation from the people: Hy-
man Bros vs. kapena, : Hav. 76.
The evil producing these results is
the iutermixing Of such things as
hzve HnO proper relation to each
other" II, therefore, looking at the
reason stated in Article q itself, the
things covered by the law have q
proper relation 70 each other and
these are fairly well embraced in one
object, however general, and ex-
pressed in the title, it is sufficient.
This provision Of the Constitution
should be literally construed. To
eonstrue it strictly would, by ham
peFing legislation, cause as great evil
in one direction as was intended TO be
prevented in the other direction
Says Judge Cooley lConst. Linn, PIP.
II, 146J:
''The general purpose Of these pro-
visions l. accomplished when a law
hiss but one general object, which is
fairly indicated by its title. To re-
quire every end and means necessary
or convenient for the accomplishment
OF this general object, to be provided
for BY 4 separate act relating 10 that
alone, would not only be UnTeason-
able, but would actually render legis-
IatiOu impossible The
generality OF title i therefore no
objection to il, so long as it Is not
made q cover to legislation incOngru-
Gus in itself, and which by no fair in
teadmeut can be considered as having
Z Necessary or proper connection.
The legislature must determine Tor
itself how broad and comprehensive
shall be the object Of 3 statute, and |
how much particularly shaII be en-
pIOyed in the title in defining it.T
-
fsThere has been 4 general DISPOSE
ton to eonstrue the constitutional |
provision literally, rather than to
embarrzss legislation by construc-
ton whose strietness Is unnecessary |
to the accomplishment Of the benef-
eiaI purposes for which it has been
adopted
The courts Of California and Ohio
even 90 50 far too far, we think as to
hold that such provisions Of the con-
stitution are merely directory and not |
mandatory at all. Washington 80.
Murray. 4 Cal, IS; PIN. =. Mich
olson, s Oh Ct. IL. In O'LeaEy ".
Cook Co., . Ill, "a, cited with ap-
prevail by Judge Cooley, it was held /
that clause prohibiting the sale Of
ardent spirits within four miles Of
COLLEGE was 20 related 70 the primary
object Of an act Incorporating the col
lege as TO be properly included
within II