The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1904-04-15


nally sustained but technically over
ruled in the appropriations test case
entitled, an re Hawaiian Star News
paper Association, Limited" The
appeal from decision of the Audi
tor declining to issue a warrant
for paying a printing bill of
S25l.25 incurred by the tax bureau is
dismissed but without prejudice. Dep
uty Attorney General Il. c. Peters APP
peared for the appellant. ana Holmes
q Stanley for the Auditor.
LAW LAID DOWN.
Following is the syllabus of the opin-
ion, based on the reasoning of Chief
Justice Frear who wrote the main de-
liyerance which shows that the cause
for dismissing the appeal is that the
Treasurer took the six months bill of
1903 as the guide for supplying def
ciencies in appropriations for the last
eighteen months of the biennial period,
when, under the saving provision of the
Organic Act, he should have had re-
course to the appropriation bill of 1901:
L
session in 1903 to provide for the nee
essary expenses of the government for
the succeeding biennial period. In its
extra session Immediately after. II
passed complete appropriation bills for
the first six months of the biennial
period. and bills providing for a por-
ton of the necessary expenses of the
last eighteen months, but failed to pro-
vide for perhaps a half of the neces-
sary expenses for those eighteen
months on the supposition that those
expenses would be borne by counties
under an act which turned out to be
void. Held.
That the expenses so unprovided for
could be paid out of the last appro-
priation bills by the Treasurer with the
advice of the Governor under section
"a of the Organic Act. and
THAT the last appropriation bills.
within the meaning of that section,
were those of 1901 and not the six
months bills of 1908"
THE ARGUMENT
1T is not disputed" the court says
in the body of it's opinion, that the
expenses now in question We're 'neces-
| StirS CURRENT tNptllHtS Niliiiil NiiV ii'S''''
ing of Sec. "a of the Organic Act"
The court also finds that the Legis-
lature acted" and did so lin good
faith" in making appropriations in 1903.
and that it's failure to appropriate
money for necessary expenses was en-
tirely due to its confidence that the
County Act was valid. In strict sense
| it might be said to have acted If 1t
had only "considered' appropriations
and rejected them, but nobody would
contend that in such case it had act
ed within the meaning of the law.
There is considerable discussion of
| the purport of the word biennial as
applied to legislative sessions and APP
preparations. the court saying:
IF it means that every appropriation
| bill must cover a period of two years
or that appropriation bills may be pass
ed only one in two years, that is. at the
regular session or the extra session i'm
mediately following the regular session.
there would be extreme embarrassment.
In such case most of the appropriation
bills thus far passed by the Territorial
Legislature might be void or the Leg
islature at its present special session
might not be able to relieve the
present financial situation at all
by the passage of appropriation
bills. This court has already
held that the Legislature could
divide the biennial period. by passing
one set of bills for the time before the
county act should take effect and an
other set for the time thereafter"
The opinion discountenances the idei
| NJ. ~
supplement the action of the Legisla
ture in the exercise of the Legislative
function of passing appropriation DIS
on this the court says;
Whether those officers could max
payments under the last appropriation
bills in case the Legislature should in
tentionally omit a single appropriation
as unnecessary without first speciiical
ly and independently repeating at IL
regular session the law, If any, for tn
execution OF which similar appropria
ton had been made by the preceding
Legislature. IL is unnecessary To say
II viii be time enough to decide tina
question when II arises"
ON the question of what constitute
the last appropriation bills" the fol
lowing shows the courts mind
THE appropriations of 1901 were IA
ones To be deemed reapproprinted unit
the Legislature should act and onl
such sums appropriated Ia the last hl
preparation bills shall be deemed
have been reuppropnnled' as are noe
rasaN Ia supply the deficiencies
whether any new bills are passed ,
not the now bills replace lhr ul
Tones Aa Tar as lhrY Hn Tho sums U
appropriated son uu,H-HrN eultul r'
pfusts aIr lhr HHf uNHa Win HIfI.H
lH iha slime rrlhn nf lnai D. NN'
ihrY Ru WplHNl Wl uHlN M Pr lHf a
ihry aw pNl rra.rl hf lhf p.N nNN
llhHr n uImHF lu NlNlie lNai I
3 noon NlH anH4.l lH HWiINl ni#l
h llNH l|Hi anIil .IWH.l ~ HI
\ lHN mNH NJ HHf HIuNN n ~ N
\ INuHI. lH .HA Nd W0h H'. N
III M I#I m NNaI i|'
\ Hf l"H HH WlNH lnHs #H
H.N0I .."'