The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1907-01-01
CASE
DRAWN OUT
tFrom Saturdays Advertiser

MOI until some time after a week
from Monday next will Judge De Bolt
decide the Lanai injunction case. As
far AS Governor Carter is concerned
the temporary injunction was dissolved
at noon yesterday, the court holding
that the Judiciary had no power over
the Executive to restrain the latters
discretion in approving of n public
transaction.
All the forenoon session had beer
taken up with argument on the Attor
ney Generals motion to dissolve tn,
injunction as it related to the Gov
| ernor
In the afternoon the hearing wa,
on the demurrer of Land Commissioner
Pratt to the petition OF L. l.. McCand
less for injunction. At clock Judge
De Bolt first suggested continuance
and, counsel on both sides not wishing
that, then n submission of the points
Mt issue on briefs.
Accordingly it was arranged that the
brief for the respondent be filed by
Tuesday morning, that for the petit.
TONER by Friday and the reply brief
for the respondent by the following
Monday. So not until Judge De Bolt
has all these briefs in hand can he
finally consider his decision.
Mr.. Gear in the morning tried to have
the hearing further continued until
January 3. He stated that he had
written to the Attorney General of the
United States for an opinion on the
question. and he suggested that the
court cable to the same functionary for
advice upon the course to be pursued
Judge De Bolt considered that It was
a matter for himself to pass upon and
directed the argument to proceed, first
on the motion to dissolve the temper
ary injunction and next on the demur-
rer.
Attorney General Peters opened the
argument In the Governors case. quot
ing many authorities to show that the
Territorial courts have no Jurisdiction
over the official acts Of the Governor.
He contended that IL the proposed ex-
change Of lands was illegal there was
a remedy against the person to whom
the public lands were transferred in a
bill Of equity to set the sale aside.
Gee. d. Gear replied for the petition
er. quoting some cases where courts in
the States took jurisdiction over the
official doings Of governors.
The court did not deem 1t necessary
to rule on the question Of jurisdiction,
but held that no act Of the Governor
had been placed in Issue by the petit
ton. Thus far the Governor had only
approved of proposed act II such
act was illegal the remedy would be
complete II the Commissioner Of Pub
lie Lands were enjoined from its COM
mission. Hence the temporary writ,
SO far as 1t affected the Governor, was
dissolved.
Deputy Attorney General Milverton
in the afternoon presented a complete
argument for the demurrer of the Land
Commissioner. A host of authorities
was cited to show that a private tax
payer could not interfere to prevent
any official act, even II illegal, unless
he were liable to personal loss or in
jury from the act. Argument was al
so presented to show statutory autho-
ity for the proposed exchange Of lands,
when the lands desired by the govern
ment in the deal were to be devoted
exclusively to public purposes as in this
case.
Mr.. Gear, whose argument was inter-
rupted at s o'clock by the courts sug-
gestion Of continuance as above stat
ed, argued that the Federal law Of the
Organic Act prohibited the sale Of more
than one thousand acres. Another
point he offered was that a taxpayer
was personally Interested where loss
of revenue was to result from an act,
as in this case through the stopping Of
rentals to the government from the La
mai lands.
Judge De Bolt, in expressing his de-
sire for the submission of briefs. said
the court wished full enlightenment
on the question of whether
the Limitation of sales to 1000 acres ap-
piled to exchanges, also on the ques-
ton Of the competency of private
taxpayer to take proceedings where
revenue was involved.