Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1915-08-25
Counsel For Both Sides Argue
as to Extent of Work Done BY
City Prior to Injunction

y
Argument was to be completed to
day in the Injunction suit Gr1u%lt by
Ray c. Brown, act Rg fer citizen:
and taxpayers OF ManOa, against tn
city and county. the supervisors anG
other municipal officers, and il is e.
pecte1 that Circuit Judge T b. Stna1
will at once take the matter under a!
visement preparatory TO handing dor.
decision. ....... 49,:
The argument of both sides has been
lengthy and has dealt largely with tho
question OF what does. and what does
not, constitute maintenance. repair;
and reconstruction in road work. ~.
In the complaint the petitioner al,
legged that the WORK which was being
done by the city and county en- that
portion OF Queen street from the y III
ann Stream TO the pris n road; the
approach to the Hackfeld wharf and
section CT road at the intersection o.
Beretania and King streets, in Moilii.
ii, was in excess of maintenance and
repairs and therefore in violation o.
that section OF the revised laws which
~
paid for out of public funds. The re,
spondents contend that all the work
was in the nature of repairs, and that
il did not constitute reconstruction.
The argument as presented b. At.
torney Clarence II. Olson, counsel for
the petitioner, has been, in effect, as
follows: ~. .-....
What Does Act Mean?
In the first place, it was pointei out
that the enly question before the court
was in the Interpretation of the terms
repairs and maintenance" as used
in an act of the Legislature of 1915
and, in that connection, attention was
called to the fact that this act pro-
vfdes a general scheme of road i'm
proyement on the assessment glan.
under which road improvements and
construction may not be made out OF
the public treasury, with the excep,
ton of ordinary repairs and main.
tenence. ..-.. .-=. ~
The improving OF roads, as covered
in the statute, covers new work
curbing, altering and improving streets
or any parts thereof, and therefore
anything that is real reconstruction.
Whether or not, in any case, work that
is done on a street is reconstruction
OF repairs, is therefore the test, coun-
sci argued, and, according to the facts
shown in the case, as well as the testi-
mony of all the engineers who ap-
peared as witnesses, there could be
no question that the work on Queen
street and the road running from
Queen street to the wharyes was re-
construction rather than repairs, be-
cause the entire surface was repaired
with an asphalt-macadam pavement
about six inches thick, Olsen con-
tinned.
This pavement, counsel said, was
more durable and more expensive than
any pavement which had been on the
streets before, and it's cost was just
as great as that of the original pave
ment
On Beretania street, the testimony
of the city and county engineer, l..
M. Whitehouse, showed that the real
purpose for filling the street was to
bring the street up to grade in two
sections where, for some reason, the
road was considerably lower than the
general grade of the street, stated
counsel. Therefore that too was in
fact new construction, although the
claim was made that it was merely
repairs. -. -.
Olson Swats Whitehouse. .. IL.
'The only excuse for the work un-
dertaken by the city officials in these
instances Is to be found in the theory
expounded by the city and county en-
gineer in his testimony when, yester.
Gay morning he stated that, in his
opinion, anything would be repairs,
no matter how extensive, if done to
restore road to its original condi-
tion," counsel continued.
In other words, said Attorney Oh
son, If, at some time in the past, there
had been a pavement on a portion of
the road which had been worn thin