The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1903-06-09
COUNTY ACT
NOW ARGUED
Judge Gear Takes
Matter Under
Amusement.

under advisement. They INCLUDE the
constitutionality of the Act, it's legal
passage by the Legislature and, rela-
ted to the latter. the competency OF
the evidence on legislative proceedings.
Speaker Beckley and Clerk Meheuiu
of the House Of Representatives gave
evidence, amidst a running battle over
its admissibility, the substance OF
which was that the final passage OF
the bill by the House was through
adoption of the conference report on
a vote of ayes and noes. The clerk
could not put his finger on the place
in the journal where the bill from
conference passed third reading.
Speaker Beckley thought the hack
mems license clause never passed the
Legislature. President Crabbe anu
Clerk Savidge of the Senate testified
to practically the same things as the
House officers. They could not say
that the hackmen's clause had passed
the Senate.
CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTION.
Attorney General Andrews argued
that the Act was constitutional, COM
menting on the care the courts should
exercise in passing upon the constitu-
tionality of enactments. Replying to
Mr.. McClanahans contention that the
creation of the Board Of Public In
situations by the measure contraversed
the provision of the Organic Act which
made all public boards appointive by
the Governor, the Attorney General
tot +hof fhic would mako OF
the Governor an absolute ruler and
there could be no election of officers
excepting members of the Legislature.
There was a difference between boards
of indisputably Territorial jurisdiction.
such as the forestry and pharmacy
boards, and the Board of Public In
situations made up of various depart
mental officials. With regard to the
divesting of the Superintendent of
Public Works of functions accorded
him by the Organic Act. he denied
that the County Act Invested any off,
GERS of their constitutional powers.
In reply to remark by McClanahan
that all the Superintendent powers
were taken away, the Attorney Cen
eral said there was nothing in the
Orpanic ACT which said the duties OF
an official could not be transferred to
other hands. Stress was laid on the
provision of the Organic Act that GER
tain things directed by it might be.
modified by the Legislature.
LEGALITY OF LEGISLATION.
Mr.. McClanahan in the afternoon at
tackled the validity of the Act on the
ground that it had never passed the
LEGISLATURE If the rules of the Senate
were contrary to the Organic Act they
must be set aside. There was no third
reading of this bill even by title. Il
an amended bill might be passed with
out being read they might as we'll,
delegate all legislation to commit
tee. In this bill there We're Senate
amendments, House amendments, con-
ference northumberland the title
was changed-the alterations made IT.
practically a new bill. They certain
~ considered the title important when
they amended it. The original Senate
bill had one tile and this one had
another. Some entry should be found
in the journal of the House of the
ayes and noes on the third reading of
the bill, otherwise it could not be-
come law.
Assuming that there was no flaw In,
the title, he said in reply to a remnrh
by the court, they contended that the
Act before the court never passed the
houses. They commended that the re-
qpirement to speak English or Ha-I
waiian in the hackmen's provision
was not PASSED by both houses. The
engrossed bill had that requirement I'M
it, which was not in the other Dill at
all. Therefore the Governor had sign
ed a bill containing a material provl-
sion which had not passed both houses.
Without claiming that all amendments
must pass three readings. they never.
theless maintain ed that there was no
reading at all of the bill signed by
the Governor.
IMPORTANCE OF DECISION.
One word in conclusion, Mr.. Nicola
nahan said, as to what the duty OF
the court should be, without presum-
ing that the court did not realize its
duty. They believed that the court
had the power to pass on the con-
stitutionalty of the Act. 1t was d
measure of great Importance to this
community. If the Act was invalid 1t
would come out some time and the
question might as we'll be settled now.
Attorney General Andrews agreed
with counsel on the Importance of an
early determination of the question as
to the whole Act. This was more i'm
portant than the point regarding the
powers of officials of the Government.
CANNOT GO BEHIND.
Continuing. the attorney General
claimed that his original point was
correct. that the courts could not, un-
der the United States decisions quot
ed, go back OF the certificates OF the
officers OF the Legislature. That was
Senate bill No, 1 and 1t passed three
times in the Senate and three times in
the House. and there were certain
amendments made to 1t in conference.
The question put on the final reading
was whether that bill should pass as
amended. II they took the evidence
Of ala xx,t tol