The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1903-12-29


Hawaii against the Supervisors OF the
County of Oahu, returnable at p. m
the same day before Judge De Bolt
The First Circuit Judge held court al
that hour, when the respondents pre-
sented an answer to the petition. d. a
Matthewman and C. II. Hemenway ap'
peared for the Territory, and County
Attorney w. T. Rawlins and A. >
Hartwell for the Supervisors.
Petition and answer were submitted
without argument, whereupon the
court rendered judgment pro forma DIS
missing the petition. An appeal to the
Supreme Court was noted on behalf ol
the Territory, which was forthwith per-
fected. The hearing and determina-
ton of the appeal now only await the
convenience of the Supreme Court
which being under adjournment uhtil
January II may hold special sitting
for this emergent case.
Herewith are printed the answer II
defendants and the judgment OF the
court in full excepting the titles:
DEFENDANTS ANSWER.
In answer to the plaintiffs petition
in the above entitled cause, the Defend
ants severally answering, say:
/. That these defendants admit that
each and every fact averred in the
plaintiffs petition is true in manner
and form as therein stated and set
forth and that their sole authority for
acting as Supervisors of the County
provisions of Act 81 of the Session
Law of 1903, and that the defendants
have been elected as Supervisors OF
the County of Oahu In conformity
Herewith.
2. That these defendants deny that
the said County Act, being Act 81 OF
the Session Laws of 1903, Is inValid
or in contravention of any of the pro-
visions of the Organic Act OF the Ter
ritory or unauthorized thereby, but
these defendants aver and submit that
the said County Act Is valid exercise
of the grant of legislative power made
to the Territory of Hawaii In ana by
the said Organic Act OF Congress. be-
ing an Act entitled ito provide gov
ernment for the Territory of Hawaii
and that the said County Act in all re-
spects conforms to the requirements
of said Act of Congress.
2. That the said Organic Act ex-
pressly declares in Section 55 thereof,
.'that the legislative power of the Ter
ritory shall extend to all rightful SUBJ
jects Of legislation not inconsistent
with the Constitution and laws OF the
United States locally applicable ami
that none of the provisions Of the SAID
County Act are inconsistent with the
Constitution or with any law of the
United States locally applicable.
A. And further, that the said Act of
Congress expressly declares In Section
56 thereof that the Legislature may
create counties and town and city mu-
inequalities within the Territory of Ha-
wall and provide for the government
thereof" and that each and every
provision in said Act contained in re-
spect of appointive public boards or
appointive territorial officials having
the care and custody of public property
or otherwise howsoever Is necessarily
qualified and modified and to be deem
ed as subordinate to the general au-
thority therein granted for creating
and providing for the government
thereof.
5. That this Court having decroed in
effect that the provision in said Coun-
ty Act providing for n Board of Public
Institutions Is invalid and of no effect,
there is now in legal effect but one
subject contained in said County Act
and that it does not follow that said
County Act is invalid in any other re-
spect than in respect of the said pro-
vision for a Board of Public Institu-
tions, but on the contrary, that the
said County Act is valid notwithstand-
ing said provision therein contained
and now declared to be void
6. That the requirement of said Act
of Congress That the final passage of
bill in each house shall be by ma ,
jority vote of all it's members to which
such house is entitled, taken by ayes
and noes and entered upon the journal,
is merely directory and is not impera-
tive and that such requirement may be
waived by either house and when not
complied with is conclusively deemed
TO be waived, and further, that the
said County Act having been signed by
the proper officers of the Legislature
and approved and signed by the Gov
ernor of the Territory. the alleged fact
noes thereon cannot now be set up or
inquired into as n ground for declaring
said Act to be invalid.
Wherefore, the defendants submit
that they are entitled to a Judgment
or decree declaring that they are quail
flied and legally authorized 10 perform
the duties of Supervisors of the Coun-
ty Of Oahu in conformity with the
provisions of Act 81 of the Session
Laws of 1908, entitled IAN Act provid-
ing for the organization and govern
ment OF Counties and Districts and the
management and control of public
works and public institutions therein"
Notwithstanding any matter or thing In
the plaintiffs petition stated or set
forth. and that the plaintiffs petition
be dismissed with costs.
]. A. GILMAN,
NJ. p. ROBINSON,
JOHN LUCAS,
A. HOOKING,
FRANK r. HARVEY,
]. NJ. KEALOHA