The Hawaiian gazette., 1902-12-02
INT tmcurNt AND TINT stNArt

The SITTING ~ che s.rais Boz SPECIAL
f,ssign Immediately foiloviur ih, woe
tory ~ political party ut the p''lF
which had previously held only n min0r.
ty representation Boo tho local les'a.h
ture. haa enlisted a special interest Iu
the principles under which official np-
poinimvnts ore made IN the American
system. and the comparative Influence
81 the executive and the senate in ODE
matter
Those who would sponge the slate
and make a complete new dopartut
undoubtedly regard such plan 90 %"
In the line 81 "a good ns well as Nig-
oruus party policy They may or may
not have answered 10 themselves the
larger questions whether such action
H. sound from the standpoint of the
interests Of the whole public.
such a proposition brings up the
question Of who has the initiative, the
executive or the Senate? L. the author
ity of the executive in making appoint
ments by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate" so limited that
he must follow such advice In making
his nominations? There are those who
hold that the word advice" in the
law may mean this
1t may not be directly argued by the
radical constructionist that the power
Of the Senate I'm the matter Of appoint
ments Is paramount to that Of the eT-
ecutivc, yet, would not the right of
initiation give such paramount author
ity? And if the Senate has the initia-
tive, of what use is the right Of veto
as expressed in the word consent"
1t can hardly be seriously argued that
their powers are equal, as it has been
asCertaned by experience that the
scheme Of investing two officers or Off
cial bodies with the same executive
powers to be exercised at the same time
has ever been a failure. II they are
supposed to form one body for the time
being, there appears no provision of
law for the relief of the inevitable oc-
casional deadlOcks that would occur,
as presumably they would each have
one vote and but one.
Inasmuch as the responsibility for
the execution of the laws and the main
tenance of order is placed upon the
executive, it Is not unreasonable to sup
pose that Congress intended that he
should have full freedom in the seleC
ton of his subordnates on whom he
must depend for the due execution Of
the laws, subject only to the Senate's
veto and the provision as to it's advice
Even If this means that the Senate
shall he consulted, there are no words
requiring the executive to follow its
advice in making nominations and
thereby destroying his initiative.
This conclusion is borne out by the
words of the organic act which place
the appointing power in the hands of
the executive, limited only as aforesaid,
and not in the Senate, and still more
pointedly in the provision requiring the
executive to nominate certain officials;
which provision is without any limiting
words. 1t is as follows: The Governor
shall nominate and, by and with the
advice and consent of the Senate of the
Territory of Hawaii, appoint" etc.
Undenably there is an element of
safety in a rule or custom that requires
a responsible official to seek advice such
/ practice tending to check rashness and
/ promote wise and conservative action
! While, however, it is desirable from
! the standpoint of good administration
! that the executive shall be in touch
with his party, any attempt to weaker
! his initiative or cause a transfer of his
, responsibility, wholly or partially, tC
others, who are without any legal re-
sponsibility, can only tendrto govern
| ment by a Boss.