Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1916-05-16
FORBES BILLS
DENIED; STUART
RAPS GOVERNOR
Confined IRON page one)

penses were decided in joint deci-
sion handed down " Jndge Stuart to-
day. he finds for the plaintiff ia
both cases, aad gives notice that d
final decree will be entered in eacl:
case. The other cases remain TO be
tried. .+.
Gives Notice Of Appeal.
Notice OF appeal 10 the supreme
court was given today by Antonio
Perry. counsel for Forbes, and Deputy
Attorney General Arthur G. Smith, one
OF counsel for the governor and other
respondents. -
AS matter or fact, the notice OF
appeal has been drawn up for several
weeks" Mr. Smith told the court
Out OF the moneys expended b.
Forbes while on the mainland, amount
ing. 10 more than $1,000. IL is alleged
I'm the original complaint that he en-
deayored 90 have Sos -. expenses for
a dinner to senators I'm the national
capital. paid by the governor out OF
sDecial appropriation To which only
the governor has access. II is further
alleged that Forbes endeavored 10
have another portion of the expenses.
amounting TO about $500, paid from
the funds of the public utilities con-.
mission. The two suits involving the
expenditure of these amounts were de-
cided today. :...... r.. -. ...."
On January IL, 1916, says the deci
sion. Forbes, then in Washington, sent
a cablegTam to the governor request
ink authority to eXpend $l00 for en-
tertainment. Replying the same day,
Governor Pinkham cabled Forbes aa-
thority TO make the expenditure
Forbes expended 1856 for a dinner
TO senator's The decision adds that
On February s, this year. Wilder adj
Yised the utilities commission that IL
Il approved for payment any por-
ton OF Forbes bills the facts would be
laid before the grand jury. -
Commenting in this respect, Judge
Stuart says: j.. T."
Comments on Attorney-Generai.
"On February Ia or Is, the attorney
general gave the question an Oral
emergency treatment, before the com
mission, in which he arrived at the
conclusion that the claim was illegal
and could not be paid The public
was never informed Of this opinion;
the first information that the court
had of IL was obtained from the an
swer herein. The encouragement
takes the position that his opinions
in matters Of this kind are not public
property. think differently. Ii such
an opinion had been rendered and
made known. the bringing OF this case
might have been avoided.
The more we consider the question
the palmer 1t grows" the decision
continues. The object of the law liz
s 10 take away from any officer the in
ducement 20 do wrong by placing such
restrictions upon him. II officers can
avoid the provision OF the law by al
lowing themselves or their co-workers
: M the board sums that are not con-
templated By law, there Will be no
end TO the evils that will find their
way into such practises."
( Cannot Deal With Self.
In an opinion heretofore filed the
court held that q member of board
could not contract with himself, and
That the members of board could not
allow themselves compensation or
travelling expenses or board bills out
side Of those expressly provided for
by law, and that the mourning of any
other expenses would be ultra wires.
$50 far as legislation is concerned"
says Judge Stuart, I'VE have our
representative before Congress at the
public expense 10 lock after cur inter
ests. One board may take the view
that certain legislation is necessary;
another one OF equal authority may
take the opposite view. Can they both
hire officials or appoint members from
their own boards to 60 to Washington
a. public expense and advocate their
different views?
May use Personal Funds.
The members of these boards may
feel sufficiently interested as indiyid
uals to wish to be heard as citizens,
and they may pay their own expenses
or the expenses of an agent for that
purpose. but they must not use terri
tcrial funds for the purpose Of carry
ina out their private views. u Is un-
lawful and Unauthorized"
Referring TO the dinner which
Forbes gave in Washington, Judge
Stuart emphasizes the statement that
:. -.telegrams show that the governor
absolutely authorized this expendi-
ture.s
"He has no authority in the law to
authorize dinners at Washington OF
this kind" the decision continues,
aand the attorney-general does not
claim that he had any such authority.
Il 10 claim that should not be paid
from the public funds under any con.
sideration. The governor has done all
that was necessary ON his part TO
make IL claim against the territory
tif there was any validity In it,"
Concluding, Judge Stuart says:
las matters stood when these ac-
lions we're commenced, ] think the
piaintiff tWilderl was fully justified
in bringing them. There may be a
hack OF proof as to some of the Off
GERS as TO threats as to what they
would do. but there is no doubt in my
mind as to the fact that each OF them
would have taken the steps necessary