The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1907-01-12

Judge DE Bolt this morning filed an
opinion I'm che famous Lanai injunction
case u which he sustained L l.. Nc
C3udless complainant against Governor
George r.. Carter ana Land Commis-
siouer Pratt respondents. The opinion
Overrules the demurrer of Pratt and
the injunction preventing him from
making the proposed exchange of the
government lands on Lanai stands, The
,iujunrtion as relating to Governor
Garter was dissolved some days ago.
Pratt is given 10 days in which to
answer the bill i'm equity for an injunc-
tlon, otherwise the injunction win be
made permanent.
The full text Of the opinion is as
follows:
This is a bill i'm equity whereby the
complainant as citizen and taxpayer
seeks to have the Commissioner of Pub
lie Lands restrained from exchanging
certain public lands on the island of
Lanai for other lands; and also to have
the governor enjoined from approving
Of such exchange.
Upon the bill being filed an order,
temporarily restraining the respondents
was signed. Thereafter, the Attorney
General, appearing specially on behalf
Of the governor, moved that the tenn
porary restraining order be dissolved
and the bill dismissed as to the gov
ernor on the grounds that the court
was without jurisdiction of the person
Of the respondent as governor, and
that the bill and temporary restraining
order was an attempt to interfere with
the governor in the exercise of his dis
cretion in the execution of his powers,
and that the order was also an un-
warranted and illegal assumption Of
judicial control of the official acts Of
the governor
The court orally granted this motion
and ordered that the temporary in
junction be dissolved and that the bill
be dismissed as to the governor; the
court in so ruling taking into consider
alton all the grounds urged on behalf
Of the motion, but more particularly
the ground that the restraining order
was an attempt to interfere with the
discretionary powers of the governor,
and also upon the further ground that
in no event could or would the governor
be called upon to exercise his discre-
ton until the commissioner had made
SuCn exchange, WHICH ne COulu lOl w
during the continuance of the tempor-
ary restraining order, and if this order
were made peranent that would neces-
sarily end the whole matter. The in
ability of the commissioner to act pend
ing these proceedings obviating the
necessity, if any existed, for the con-
tinuance of the temporary restraining
order as to the governor.
The Attorney General, on behalf of
the Commissioner, interposed de-
murrer to the bill which was orally
argued and submitted by counsel;
whereupon the court took the matter
under advfsement, requesting counsel
to file briefs upon two points raised by
the demurrer, namely:
% Whether or not complainant as
a citizen and taxpayer had the right to
bring and to maintain this suit.
(2) Whether or not the threatened
act of the Commissioner to exchange
said public lands for other lands is un-
authorized by law and therefore ille-
gal.
AS to the first point, the Attorney
General contends that the complainant
can not maintain this suit as a citizen
and taxpayer, unless he has suffered