The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1896-05-14


by the proposed law. The sections in
the existing law already read by him
regarding that point do not seem to
prove his statement.
Rep. Robertson (continuing)-Th
present bill simply shuts man out OF
the right of appeal and makes it a
| plain case Of the Board of Health vs..
the landowner, in which the Board has
! final and conclusive power TO try its
| own case. That the Board is working
/ in the interests OF the public health
/ does not change the matter in the least.
! 1t is true that the present Board Of
| Health is good one, but we cannot be
| assured of always having a good one
| At any rate, l think as Rep. Kamauoha
| does, that wherever great power is
| given there is always a tendency to
usurpation and stretching that power to
the utmost.
If the section is passed, the Board of
Health can step in, in any case, and
say that certain land is deleteriouS to
the public health. That settles matters
The Minister of the Interior tells the
landowner that he must comply with
the action of the Board of Health and
remove the nuisance within the space
of thirty days. If he refuses to do this,
the Government comes in and does the
work. A lien is placed upon the land
which can be fOreclosed after a certain
length of time if the landowner does
not pay expenses. The land is sold at
auction and the Government deducts
the amount for expenses from the sum
received, and the landowner gets what's
left. During all these proceedings the
landowner must be perfectly mute and
unable to lift finger or say word in
his own defense. 1t is true, the land
owner may come before the Board to
state his case, but that-body is not
forced to listen to him. | tell you we
cannot afford to give this branch of the
Government any such power.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs has
stated that if Section is knocked out,
the remaining sections will not be
worth the paper upon which they are
written. l submit that there will be left
enough power to the Board of Health
without Section 3.
The only difference is that if the
| landowner should deny the allegations
| made by the Board of Health, he has
a chance to defend himself. When the
Government comes in with it's workers
to make certain improvements, he has
MES that his land is in a deleterious
condition, the Government will have
| to prove that it is before proceeding
| any further.
In my mind this is not as cholera
epidemic or the black plague, which
| must be acted upon summarily, and
| therefore it should not be in their
power to do as proposed in Section 8
of this Act. l move that Section be
stricken out. Carried.
Minister Cooper-Mr. Speaker, l
move that the consideration of the re-
mainder of the bill be indefinitely post
poned. The Government does not wish
to have it go on the law books in it's
present form.
Rep. Winston-Is it not barely pos
sible that some other people may want
to have it go into effect
Rep. Rycroft-If it is true, as Rep.
Robertson says, that the bill would give
the Board of Health ample power with
out Section 3, then l see no reason why
it should not be further considered.
Minister Cooper-It is nonsense to
go on with it in it's present form.
Rep. observation-disclosures. Strike it
out! Save timei
Motion carried.
Senate bill No. 9, relating to taxes,
brought up for consideration,
Section Z, relating to poll and school
taxes, provoked great deal of discus
sion.
Rep. Bond proposed an amendment
and Rep. Kamauoha objected, saying
it was too long and cumbersome.
Rep. Kamauoha continued, saying
that the amendment introduced by the
Senate was a good one in that it gave
man the option of paying his taxes or
working them out on the road. Section
passed with Senate amendments.
After reading the section regarding
the tax on dogs, Rep. Kamauoha asked
the Minister of Finance the reason for
taxing female dogs more than male
dogs.
Minister DamOn-In all countries in
which sheep are raised they are subject
| to great deal of irritation by the rfM'-
ages of dogs. In Maui a sheep ranch
was completely ruined by dogs. The OBJ
ject of the difference in tax is to pre-
vent breeding.
Rep. Kamauoha-All dogs should be
taxed alike. Now, then, there are no
sheep in Puma, but in that lonely, desc
late region dog is a great deal of COM
pany, and again they are useful in
hunting down wild hogs at that place.
Then agaGn good dog is a terror to
chicken thief
Reps. Robertson and Rycroft were in
favor of the section as in the bill Rep.
Robertson said that dogs were a hor-
rible nuisance to all but their owners.
Rep. Kamauoha's motion to have all
Gogs taxed alike was lost, and the sec
ton passed as in the bill.
The House had reached Section 20
when Rep. Kamauoha moved to ad-
journ. Motion lost
The remainder of the afternoon ses-
sion was spent in reading and passing
the different sections of the bill I'D to
The Goth page, or about half way
through.
At p. M. the band struck up on the
Executive building grounds and the