The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1903-09-05

ted States over which the Territory
had no authority"
In the opinion of February Z, 1902,
after reference to the statutes of
Hawaii, the joint resolution of July
Z, 1898 go Stat, 750), and to the pro-
visions of sections 70 and 81 of the
Act of April 80, 1890 81 Stat, 140, to
provide a government for the Terri
tory of Hawaii, it is said:
THE FORMER OPINION
'To whom the title of the property
acquired by the exchange should be
taken depends upon the purpose of
it's acquisition. If the land acquired
is for uses of local government, such
as street and road widening and ex-
tension named by the Governor, title
should be taken to the Territory. The
United States. has no interest in public
property of that kind acquired after
the cession, except the sovereign right
of supervision of the local government
in the regulation of it's use and its
disposal of it. Public property of that
kind. strictly of local interest, belongs
to the local government and in ac-
QUESTION of it title should be taken
would be the result if the same public
lands were sold and the proceeds used
for this local public purpose in pur-
suance of the resolution of annexa ton.
BY adopting the Hawaiian public land
laws. including those relating to ex-
changes, Congress indicated its con-
sent that this should be accomplished
by the more direct method of an ex-
change wherever that is authorized by
the laws of Hawaii.
Whether exchanges of public land
are authorized by the Hawaiian land
laws where the lands acquired in ex-
change are obtained for other than
local public uses-as, for instance, to
be part of the public domain and sub
ject to disposal as such-I have not
fully inquired, but if so the convey
ance should not be made to the Terri
tory of Hawaii, but to the United
States, which is holder of the public
lands as sovereign, though pledged to
apply them solely to the use and ben
eft of the inhabitants of the Hawaiian
Islands"
DISTINCTION DRAWN.
If it be found that any proposed ex-
change is authorized by law, it only
remains to determine in that particular
case whether the land to be obtained
is to be devoted to local public uses.
If so, the title should be taken in the
Territory of Hawaii, and if otherwise,
it should be taken in the United States.
There seems to be no good ground
for the, fear expressed by the Governor
of Hawaii that this construction will
operate to develop class of land with
title in the United States over which
the Territory would have no authority.
If the title be taken in the United
States, the land becomes public land
subject to the same laws and rules as
apply to other public lands acquired
by the United States under the cesslon.
After consideration of the matter, [
am of opinion that the further legis-
lation by Congress suggested by the
Governor of Hawaii, is not needed.
LOCAL CONTROL REMAINS
In the particular instances suggested,
that is, where land is acquired for the
settlement of persons on small hold
ings and for forest reservations, the
title should undoubtedly be taken in
the United States. the land so acquired
becoming a part of the public domain
and subject to disposition, care and
control as provided in the enabling act
of April 80, 1900.
The letter submitted, together with
other papers transmitted on July IS,
1908, for my information, are herewith
returned. Very respectfully.
F. L. CAMPBELL,
Assistant Attorney General.
THOS. RYAN, Acting Secretary.