The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1905-07-04

dent of the United States by the Or
ganic Act was to ratify any franchise
granted by the Hawaiian Government
ii conformity with the laws Of Hawaii,
between the dates mentioned.
The first question is as to the valid
ity Of the Act granting the franchise.
The Act in question was duly and le-
gally passed by the Legislature of the
Republic of Hawaii. Such Act, how
ever, could not become a law unless
approved by the President of the Re-
public, or passed over his veto as by
law provided. The question seems to
be, not as to the right of the Legisla
ture to pass the Act in question, but
as to the right of the President of the
Republic to approve the same, and by
force of such approval make the Act
in question law. Between the time or
the passage of the Act granting the
franchise and the approval thereof by
the President of the Republic of Ha-
wall, the Republic of Hawaii ceased
to exist as such, and all of its SOW
ereign rights, including the right of
granting franchises, passed to the Fed
eraI Government. Its President and
officials ceased to have any powers ex-
cept those continued in force by the
Treaty of Annexation.
Had the law in question been passed
subsequent to the date of the New
lands resolution or the treaty of an
nexation, it would have been voidable
by the Federal Government as an IL
legal exercise of power by a BODY of
officials having no legal right to exer-
else such power. Therefore, we come
70 no
tion, viz, tie Act which granted the
franchise to the Honolulu Rapid Tran
sit & Land Co., was, so far as the
! Federal Government is concerned, an il
legal exercise of power, and voidable
at the option of the Federal Govern
ment.
The question now arises, was such
! invalid legislation cured by the SUBJ
sequent Act of Congress permitting
the President to ratify franchises
granted between the eth day of July,
1898, and the 2Sth day of September,
! 1899, and the approval and subsequent
ratification of such franchise by the
President of the United States, in
other words, was the approval and rat
ification of the franchise of the Homo
lulu Rapid Transit & Land Co. by the
President of the United States, valid
exercise of the power in him vested by
Section Is of the Organic Acta
The same lack of power which made
any disposition of Government lands
after the passage of the treaty of an
nexation invalid, made the grant of
any franchise invalid. What can be
said of the exercise of one power may
well be said of the exercise of the
other. If the President of the United
States, under Section 73 of the Organic
Act, is given the right to ratify sales
and disposition of Government land,
made by local authorities after the
passage of the treaty of annexation,
then why, with equal force, can it not
be said that franchises granted by To-
cal authorities after the treaty of an
nexation can with equal ease be rati-
fed by the subsequent action of the
President of the United States, under
! the power granted to him by the Or
ganic Act?
1t is the opinion of this Department
that while the Act granting the fran
chise to the Honolulu Rapid Transit
& Land Company was voidable, at the
option of the Federal Government, as
an illegal exercise of power, that such
invalidity has been cured by the sub
sequent Act of Congress and by the
approval of the President of the
United States under the authority in
him vested by Section 73 of the Or
ganic Act. 1 have the honor to be,
Yours very respectfully,
(Signed) M. F. PROSSER,
Assistant Attorney General.