The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-04-01
TEST CASES
ARE ARGUED
Ought To Prevent
Troublesome
Crises.
A Point Scored Against
L. Dee In kamalo
Matter.
Grand and Trial Jurors For April
Term Are Notified To
Appear.

Both of the cases affecting public ex-
pe.nditures We're argued and submitted
before the Supreme Court yesterday.
Notwithstanding that the issues in
volved might, in the concrete, be salts
factorily composed by the Legislature
at the approaching special session,
these test cases are regarded by the
Governor as highly important. Their
determination ought to establish GER
tain guiding principles and thus pre-
vent the recurrence of any crisis of
uncertainty like that which happened
from the judicial throwing out of the
County Act.
GENERAL TEST CASE.
Treasurer Kepoikafs appeal from
Auditor Fishers refusal to issue a war
rant for the payment of Tax office
printing bill applies to many clearly
necessary expenses of the Government
which, owing to the passage of the
County Act providing for various pub
lie services. were not provided for in
the appropriations for the eighteen
months beginning January 1, 1904 The
Treasurer, in demanding payment of
the bill incurred by the Tax bureau
under his department, relied on Sec.
81 of the Organic Act, which reads
thus:
Sec. 81. That in case of failure of the
Legislature to pass appropriation bills
nf he
sary current expenses of carrying on
the Government and meeting its legal
obligations as the same are provided
for by the then existing laws, the Gov
ernor SHALL upon the adjournment of
the Legislature, call it in extra, ses-
sion for the consideration of appropria-
ton bills. and until the Legislature
shall have acted the Treasurer may.
with the advice of the Governor, make
such payments, for which purpose the
sums appropriated in the last apropri-
alton bills shall be deemed to have
been reapprooriated.
POINTS AT ISSUE.
In the case now submitted, the Legis-
lature did fail, at the regular session.
"to pass appropriation bills" 1t was
called in extra session to supply the
in the County Act which was afterward
declared void, the Legislature did not
provide for certain necessary current
expenses" etc., as the same were pro
vided for by the then existing laws. +"
The crucial point is whether, after the
Legislature had acted on appropria-
lions, any failures it still made in pro-
viding for necessary current expenses"
might be repaired under the clause
providing for executive reappropriation-
of the sums appropriated in the last
appropriation bills Another point that
has been argued in the controversy is
whether 1.-THE last appropriation bills
may be bills that have been passed at
the same session as were the defective
bills, or must the designation be APP
piled only to bills regularly passed at
the next preceding session at which
appropriations were legally made.
THE SPECIAL CASE.
The other case submitted is the APP
peal of Queens Hospital Trustees from
Auditor Fishers refusal to issue
warrant for the payment of the subsidy
that the institution named has for
many years received from the public
treasury.
This case involves the same points as
those in the general case already de-
scribed. Besides, it raises the question
of whether the hospital subsidy is part
of the necessary current expenses of
carrying ON the Government and meet
ing its legal obligations as the same
are provided for by the then existing
laws"
Deputy Attorney General Peters, who
appeared for the Auditor in both cases,
laid great stress on a contention that
the Queens Hospital was subject to
| absolutely no governmental control
The Government could not compel it to
admit single individual
A. G. NJ. Robertson, for the appel
| lants, claimed that the word .snecess-
airy" had not a restricted meaning, an
authority he quote showing that the
word might properly describe some
thing reasonably convenient He also
argued that maintaining of hospitals
was an ordinary function of the Gov
Iernments police power, as much so as
the maintenance of persons, asylums,
quarantine, etc.
| Henry Z. Cooper appeared for Treas
urer Kepoikai in the general test case.
THE TELEPHONE CASE.
Plaintiff S. NJ. Ballou was on the wit
ness stand for the greater part of the
l N"S SNoNC-N SASs III his nlJulctlOn SUIT
| against the Mutual Telephone Co, be-
ing heard by Judge Gear He dis
coursed tiuently on technical matters
| relative to telephone installation.
Among the exhibits in court is a com
| bined receiver and transmitter such as
| a local concern handled, also the desk
telephone the Mutual furnishes to GUS
toners, batteries, wires, etc, are on
view. A bill rendered by the defendant
| to H. f. Wichman that morning. dated
April l. 1904, in which 81 was charged
| for rent Of desk telephone for eleven
months, was produced in evidence