The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1899-12-06
GRIGGS' FINAL OPINION
ARRIVES TODAY FROM JUDGE
HARTwELL.
Hawaiian Government Has no Authc-
rity Except in Municipal Matters.
Status of Land Purchasers.

A copy of the final opinion of Attor-
ney-General Griggs reached the For
eign Office today. 1t is a long document
twelve pages of typewriter matter.
The opinion is addressed to President
Mckinley.
In starting out the Attorney-General
says the opinion is rendered after con-
sideration of documents and argument
presented by A. S. Hartwell Each of
the five phases of the question are dis
cussed.
The osition of the Attorney General.
in few words, is that at the moment
of the pi ssage of the resolution of an
neXation the sovereignty of the Hawa-
l.iian Government ceased to exist It's
authority over all matters was dele
gated 20 it by the President to con-
tinue until such time as Congress es-
tablish I'd permanent regulations for the
govern lent of the Islands.
1t is set forth that with the accept
ance of the annexation resolution By
! Congress the public lands of Hawaii
became the property of the United
States, end until laws were framed
providing for their opposition they
could not be parted with in any way
| While the Hawaiian Government had
acted in good faith in disposing of lands
! since July Z, 1898, those acts were lille
| gal. The letter of Minister Sewall of
l o.
Attorney-General says that il recites
two general points. 1t could not con
Vey the right to dispose of the public
! lands of Hawaii because that mower
was vested only in Congress. Coming
down to sales since the passage Of the
annexation resolution the Attorney
| General observes:
| 1T is represented that there are large
numbers of sales of public lands which
I hn Iatn to-,
ment to carry out it's own agreements
! concerning the same, made prior to
August IL, 1898. 1 understand this class
of cases to comprise those where con-
| ditional sales or entries were made by
purchasers or entrymen prior to the
| resolution of annexation, and where
the purchasers of entrymen to a grant
have been subsequently complied with
What l have said as to the cession
| of the power of the Hawaiian govern
ment to make original sales and con-
veyances subsequently to the cession
applies from legal point of view to
| this class of cases. The difficulty is
that the power of the Hawaiian gov
ernment as a sovereign possessed OF
sovereign right to make conVeyances
and grants of land ceased and all its
powers and sovereign rights in this re.
spect were transferred to the United
states. This was the same with refeu
ence to lands unaffected by any eduit-
able interest. Undoubtedly the gov
ernment of the United States can be
trusted to do justice to all persons haV-
ing just claims of this nature. Doubt
less Congress will, by legislation, pro-
vide means and Instruments for vest.
ing and confirming such titles. The
only question for my decision is wheth.
er such power now exists in the Hawai-.
ian government, and l think it does
not
Judge Hartwell's fifth point was tha
the proclamation could not be complied
with, because the money could not Dt
taken from the Hawaiian treasury fol
the purpose of recalling the property
except in due course of law by appro
priation by the Legislature.
In reply to this the Attorney Genera
says that it was not contemplated tha
payment should be required in a manner
contrary to local law or regulations o.
Hawaii, or money provided in an arbi
trary or unnatural manner, but only il
due course of law, by appropriation.