The Hawaiian gazette., 1912-12-27
BOARD IS UNABLE
TO RULE BY RULE
Big Islands Quarantine Against
Mediterranean Fruit Fly
Knocked Out.
mail Special to The Advertiser. \

(Mail Special to The Advertiser.)
HILO, December %. - The fruit-fly
case has been abandoned. Attorney Cor
rea, who went into fight against the
board Of agriculture and forestry on
its rule prohibiting the transportation
of fruit from Kohala into other dis
tricts of this island, is the proud victor.
Correa brought oranges from Kawaihae
to Hilo. He defied the fruit inspectors
who wanted to take the fruit from him.
He submitted to arrest. He ate the
oranges.
Correa won out before Judge Wise on
demurrer, which was sustained. I'm
mediately the territorial authorities In
structed County Attorney Beers to take
an appeal to the supreme court. Beers
accordingly did so and sent to the at
torney general his petition to the SUI
preme court for a writ of error.
Imagine Beers surprise when he re-
ceived from Deputy Attorney General
Smith letter in part as follows:
Rule Versus Rule.
81 note that the charge against Mr..
COrrea was based upon an alleged vio-
latiOn of Section 4, of RUE IA, of the
board of commissioners or agriculture
and forestry. This Rule IA, which was
approved by the. Governor March a.,
1912, was repealed by Rule IT, which
was approved by the Governor on Sep
TENDER II, 1912. Rule II repeats Rule
10. IL, Ia, Is and 10, and combines the
essential elements of them all. Accord
! ingly it would seem to me that mas
much as the case was brought for vio-
lation of rule which was not at the
time in existence, the only thing to do
is to abandon the proceedings.
" Although this office is not unani-
nous in this opinion, must confess that
a hasty examination of Section 377, r
l.. leaves me in some doubt as to wheth-
or the board actually has power to re-
strict or prohibit the carriage or trans
portation of fruits, etc., from one part
of an island to another part of the
same island. However, / want 10 gave
this matter more consideration before
definitely deciding this point. There il
no question but that it is absolutely
essential for the board to have sucl
power and we can probably remedy
the defect in the law, if one exists, II
this coming legislature.
This fairly took Beers breath away
but he was given the final blow wher
he received another letter from Smith
dated on the day following that of thu
writing of the first letter, reading il
part as follows:
Really No Such Rule.
"After conference with Mr.. Mott
Smith, Acting Governor, / regret t
state that inasmuch as there was mt
Rule IA in existence at the time Of thi
case and inasmuch as Rule II, Of whiel
! sent you copy by the last steamer
being a penal rule, would be strict.
construed, even though ii covers th'
, same ground AZ Rule IA, ] see nothing
10 do but to drop the case, and / ae
cordingly so advise you. f."
In other words CoTea had been mr.
rested under non-existing rule. Cor
rea gloats.
Beers expresses a very iustifable sur
prise ST the negligence of the board o
agriculture which allowed rs Inspector
10 work under rules winch had been re
poaled, thereby causing all this futil
prosecution. As matter of fact, 81
slack Is the board that 10 has not oyel
/. vet furnished lis local inspectors wit
information regarding the charge o
with copies of the new rules.
Attorney Is Surprised,
Beers has written the attorney gou
efal = department, In part az follows
= 81 wis not Informed of any amend
o ment 10 Rule II; NO q matter of fact
b I was very much surprised when 80
}. wrote me concerning the tAme' II seem