The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1906-02-28

Archer, Cox. Lucas and Moore
County Clerk Kalauokalani read the /.
of the previous meeting, which /.
were adopted.
The usual salary demands wehe pass /
ed without comment.
Superintendent Sam Johnson sub
mitted report on the work done dur
ing the past month and that projected.
He asked that the road department be
allowed $1,000 per month for work to
be done.
c. 5. Holloway superintendent of
Public Works wrote regarding the
Union street hack stand. He stated
that in his opinion the hack stand was
a nuisance and that joint letter to the
proprietor should be sent.
Supervisor Moore thought that the
hack stand might be removed to the
Hotel street side of the park in front
of the Young hotel
Supervisor Lucas expressed the idea
that the matter was entirely in the
hands of the superintendent of Public
Works.
On Moore's motion the clerk was in
structed to write the superintendent Of
Public Works recommending the re-
movaI of the hack stand to the ma
kai side of Hotel street opposite the
park.
The letter from superintendent Bah
bitt of the Department of Public ms
truction asking aid towards the up
keep of schools i'm Oahu was read by
the clerk.
On the request of Supervisor Lucas
the following opinion of County At
torney Douthitt regarding the aiding
of the schools was read:
in response to your requ st made
on the 26th day of February, 1906 as to
the powers of the Board of Supervisors
with reference to making appropria-
tions for the support of schools, pay
ment of teachers etc, l beg to say
as follows:
81 thoroughly appreciate the neces-
sity for aiding the schools, for l am
aware that the amount appropriated by
the Territorial Legislature is not suf-
ficient to maintain a proper standard
in one of the most important branches
of government, viz, the public schools.
But however, much the present con-
dition as to the public schools may be
deplored, still, the Board of Supervisors
can do only such things as are con-
tanned in the County Act or, by rsa-
sonable and necessary Implication, may
be attributable to them.
Defining the extent of power, limit
atoms and canons of construction with
regard to municipal corporations, Mr..
Dillon says in his work on this sub
iect, as follows:
ct is a general and undisputed pro-
position of law that a municipal cor
poration possesses and can exercise the
following powers and no others: first,
those granted in express words; second,
those necessarily or fairly implied in
or incident to the powers expressly
granted; third, those essential to the
declared objects and purpos of the
corporatiOn,-not simply convenient,
but Indispensable Any fair reasonable
doubt concerning the existence of pow
er is resolved by the courts against the
corporation, and the power is denied.
OF every municipal corporation, the
charter or statute by which it is Great
poration nor its officers can do any
act, or make any contract, or incur
any liability, not authorized thereby, or
by some legislative act applicable there
to. All acts beyond the scope of the
powers granted are void Dillon on
Municipal Corporations, vol l, Sec. SO.
1T is a well settled principle of con-
struction of grants by a legislative
body to municipal corporations that
only such powers and rights can be
exercised under them as are clearly
comprehended within the words of the
act or derived therefrom by necessary
implication, regard being had to the
objects of the grant. Any ambiguity or
doubt arising out of the terms used
by the Legislature must be resolved in
favor of the public. This doctrine has
been sustained by the Supreme Court
of the United States in the case of
Minton VS.. La Rue, % Howard, 435. In
subsequent cases, the Supreme Court
of the United States has said that a
municipal corporation "can exercise
no power which is not, in express terms
or by fair implication, conferred upon
it. Thompson VS.. Lee Co, 8 Wall 800;
Thomas VS.. Richmond, y Wall. 349.
80, therefore to ascertain whether
the Board of Supervisors of this Coun-
ty has the power to make appropriation
for the maintenance of public schools,
we much necessarily look to the pro-
visions of the County Act, and ascer-
tain therefrom whether this power is
expressly given or whether it is given
| by necessary implication. Subdivision
of Section 8, Chapter 4 of the County
Act reads as follows:
" No county shall in any manner give
or loan its credit to or i'm aid of any
person or corporation, and any indeht-
| edness or liability incurred contrary to
this provision shall be void i'm subdi-
vision of the same chapter, we find
the following:
IAN contracts, authorizations, al
lowances, payments and liabilities en-
! tered into, granted, made or incurred in
violation of this act shall be void and