The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1905-07-04
RAPID TRANSIT CHARTER
VALID AND NOT VIOLATED
The Republics Act was VoidabIe but |nva|idity
Cured by Act Of Coneress-.Company's
Financial Transactions Regular.

The last Legislature, instigated by
false figures and statements made by
Mr. L. E. Pinkham, charging that the
Rapid Transit Company had violated
its charter and was swindling the Gov
eminent, directed the Attorney General
to make full investigation of the va
lidity of the charter of the company,
of it's stock and bond issues, of the
dividends paid and generally all of it's
acts since it's incorporation up to date
This investigation has been made,
and Deputy Attorney General Prosser
has given the opinion of the Attorney
Generals Department.
The opinion declares that the char
ter is absolutely valid and fully and
completely vindieates the Rapid Tran
sit Company from the charges that
have been so persistently and vindic-
lively made against it.
The following is Mr.. Prosser's opin-
ion:
MIR. PROssER'S OPINION.
Honolulu, T. H., June 30th, 1905.
Hon. A. L. C. Atkinson,
Acting Governor of the
Territory of Hawaii,
Honolulu.
Dear Sir: In pursuance of the con-
current resolution of the Legislature
of the Territory of Hawaii, passed by
the Senate on the 22nd day of April,
1905, and by the House of Representa-
tives ON the Goth day of April, 1905,
directing this Department to investi-
gate the financial transactions of the
Honolulu Rapid Transit & Land Co.,
for the purpose of ascertaining if any
of it's Charter obligations to the Ter
ritory have been broken, and, further,
as to the validity of its franchise, we
make the following report and give the
following opinion as to the legality of
such Franchise:
The Company has not, so far as we
are able to ascertain, through such
financial transactions violated any of
it's charter OBLIGATIONS, and, in the is
suance of stock and payment of div
idends thereon, up to this date, is
within the rights granted to it, as set
forth in Chapter &c of the Revised
Laws of Hawaii.
The validity Of its franchise is ques-
toned, and it becomes our duty, in
this connection, to investigate the va
rious laws bearing upon the granting
of that franchise, and the validity of
such laws.
The Act of the Legislature of the
Republic of HAWAII, Act SO of the Laws
of 1898, which granted the franchise
under discussion, was passed by both
houses of the Legislature on the 9th
day of July, 1898, but did not receive
the approval of the President of the
Republic of Hawaii until the afternoon
OF the 9Th day of July, about p. m.
The joint resolution of Congress "To
Provide for Annexing the Hawaiian
Islands to the United States,'' was duly
passed by both houses of Congress, and
approved by the President of the
United States, on the 7th day of July,
1898, and was in force the whole OF
the 7th day of July in the year 1898.
BY virtue of such joint resolution,
the Hawaiian Government ceased to
exist as a sovereign power. In other
words, on the 18th day of July, 1898,
there was no such thing in existence
as the Republic of Hawaii, and the
officials thereof only continued in of
tlce for the purpose of performing pure
ly municipal functions from that date.
The Republic of Hawaii, or the Hawa-
iian Government, could, on the date
first mentioned and thereafter, exer-
else no valid act of sovereignty, and
the granting of franchise is, beyond /
question, an exercise of such RIGHT.
In this connection I quote from the
opinion of the Hon. John W. Griggs,
General of the United States, |
lated the 2lst day of November, 1899. |
The opinion referred to is addressed |
to the President of the United States,
and the question directly involved was
the validity of transfers of public
ands located in Hawaii, made by the
Hawaiian Government after the date
If the passage of the treaty of annex
alton. The Attorney General lays
Town, as broad proposition of law