Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1904-04-14
TEST CASE IS DECIDED I.
MAJORITY OPINION As
TO APPROPRIATIONS
APPEAL FROM AUDITOR DISMISS.
Ed WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
CONCURS ONLY IN
DISMISSAL.

tions' test case" entitled an Re Ha-
waiian Star Newspaper Association
Ltd, appeal from q decision of the
Auditor declining to issue a warrant
for paying a printing bill incurred by
the tax bureau. Diminishing the appeal
without prejudice. Deputy Attorney
General e. c. Peters for appellant;
Holmes & Stanley for the Auditor.
The cause shown for the dismissal
OF the appeal is that the Treasurer took
the six months bill Of 1908 as a guide
for supplying deficiencies In appropria-
lions for the last eighteen months Of
the two-years period when he should
have gone back to the appropriation
bill Of 1901.
Chief Justice Frear writes the ma
pority opinion. Justice Galbraith con-
ours in the dismissal Of the appeal but
otherwise disagrees with the majority
lopinion. Galbraith's separate opinion
appears elsewhere. Following appear
the syllabus and extracts from the ma
ljority decision:
The Legislature failed at its reg
ular session In 1908 to provide for the
necessary expenses Of the government
for the succeeding biennial period. In
its extra session Immediately after. It
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 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 30 unprovided for
could be paid out Of the last appropria-
ton bills by the Treasurer with the
advice OF the Governor under section
81 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 1903"
1T is not disputed that the expenses
now In question were necessary cur
rent expenses within the meaning of
Section 81 Of the Organic Act"
"If 1t means" (referring to the word
biennial" as applied to legislative ap-
propriations) that every appropriation
bill must cover period Of two years
or that appropriation bills may be
passed only one in two years. that is,
at the regular session or the extra ses-
sion Immediately following the regular
session, there would be extreme EN-
barrassment. In such case most of the
appropriation bills thus far passed by
the Territorial Legislature might be
void or the Legislature 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 bien-
NAL period, by passing one set OF bills
for the time before the county act
should take effect and another set for
the time thereafter
whether those officers (Treasurer
and Governor) could make payments
under the last appropriation bills in
case the Legislature should Intentional
ly omit a single appropriation as I'M
necessary without first specifically and
independently repeating at It's regular
session the law. II any. for the execu-
ton Of which a similar appropriation
had been made by the preceding Legis-
lature. It is unnecessary to say. 1t
will be time enough to decide that
question when It arises"
"The appropriations Of 1901 were the
ones to be deemed reappropriated I'M
til the Legislature should act and only
such sums appropriated In the last ap-
preparation bills shall be deemed to
have been reappropriated' as are nee
essary to supply the deficiencies.
whether any new bills are passed or
not The new bills replace the old
ones as far as they god. The sums re-
for necessary current ex-
penses are the last ones with reference
to the time spoken Of. that is. until
they are replaced and only In SO far as
they are not replaced by the new ones.
There is nothing to indicate that the
1901 bills should be applied first and
then that a shift should be made to
new bills, II any should be passed. for
periods not covered by new bills. The
previous bills-l901 or other bills--ap-
ply to the corresponding times and pur-
poses in the new biennial period, ex-
cept In SO far as they are replaced by
the new bills"
"The wording OF the appropriation
in either the six-months bill or that of
1901 answers the purposes of the
voucher now In question. and II this
were all that is required. the appeal
would have to be sustained. But as
the appropriation for 1901 can be drawn
upon only by the Treasurer with the
advice Of the Governor, and as neither
OF those officers has been shown to
have sanctioned such action, the appeal