The Hawaiian gazette., 1907-09-06
NEW WORK NOT
RUNNING EXPENSE

The effect OF Attorney General Hem
enway's opinion denying the right OF
the Public Works Department to COM
plete the Makiki reservoir and charge
the expense to running expenses OF
the Honolulu water works system viii
be make permanent the shutdown
which occurred when Auditor Fisher
refused TO audit the bills thus charged.
The similar decision as to Nuuanu
dam will probably not have any effect
except TO exhaust the remnant OF the
appropriation for the construction OF
the dam. a little sooner than would
otherwise be the case.
The body OF the opinion Is as fol-
lows:
the legality OF using the current ap-
preparation made for running ex-
penses and maintenance Honolulu"
water works for the payment OF. drst.
cost OF inspection at the Nuuanu dam:
and second. the cost of labor and ma
terial for the completion of the Ma
kik reservoir. have met with my con-
sideration.
AS to the Nuuanu dam inspection.
IL seems to me that the contention OF
the Auditor is correct. and that this
current appropriation cannot be drawn
upon for the purpose suggested The
Nuuanu dam is, in my opinion. no
part OF the present Honolulu water
system. II is a new undertaking. still
in process OF construction. Not until
IL Is completed and accepted by the
government. will It become 4 part Of
the water system. Inspection OF this
new work, while necessary and per-
haps Imperative, cannot property be
regarded as a running expense OF
the existing water system. nor can II
be regarded in any-manner as main
tenance." Sech inspection. 1t seems to
me. is part of the cost of the dam.
and provision .orsit should have been
made in the contract let for the con-
struction of the dam or in some other
manner out of the appropriation made
by the Legislature to build the dam.
The question presented as to the
Makild reservoir differs somewhat
from the question above discussed. BY
Act 81. Session Laws 1907. the Legisla-
ture appropriated the sum of $4,000 for
the completion Makiki reservoir" and
made this sum Immediately available
for that use. We must assume that
this appropriation was based upon an
estimate showing that the work
could and would be completed for this
amount or less. However, this amount
proved to be insufficient and as 1 un-
derstand, since the first of July last,
bills amounting to s1S91.7O have been
paid out of the appropriation for run
ming expenses and maintenance of wa
ter works in Honolulu.
1t is my opinion that after the ap-
preparation of $4,000 was exhausted,
you had no power to use any further
or other sums for this work. The
rule seems to be that where a specific
appropriation is made for particular
object, the Legislature will be pre-
sumed to have intended that no sums
in addition to this specific appropria-
ton should be used for that object. 1t
therefore would be unlawful to use
any other funds for such work. This
rule is clearly laid down by the Su-
preme Court in an opinion furnished by
said court to the Minister of the In
terror, reported in Hawaiian, IN
Aside from the fact that the reasoning
in this opinion appears conclusive, the
rule as there laid down is supported
by other authority in other jurisdic
tions. The case of the Makiki reser-
vOir seems to me stronger in some
ways than the case presented to the
Supreme Court and upon which this
opinion was rendered. In making the
appropriation for the Makiki reser-
voir, the Legislature chose to make it
for "the completion" of that work. 1t
seems to me, therefore, that a use of
any other sums would be an attempt
by the executive branch to legislate.
The rule above seems to me conclu-
sive on this question, but if it were
not, then the reason which has been
given in the case of the inspection of
the Nuuanu dam would apply as well
to the case of the Makik reservoir.
The work on the Makiki reservoir is
equally a new piece of construction
work and the reservoir is not as yet a
part of the Honolulu water system.
The cost of it's construction cannot
properly, as il seems to me, be con-
sidered as running expense of the
water bureau, nor is it maintenance of
the existing system. The appropria-
ton for those purposes should not
therefore be drawn upon for the pay
mont of tho hiIls in orIeGtion