Honolulu star-bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1912-2010, 1916-10-03
Light QUESTION
IS CONSIDERED
BY COMMISSION
Whether Gas Company is Sup
plying Street Illumination
is Point OF Interest

When Is street light not street
light2 In an effort to solve this ques-
tion for the public utilities commits
sion. Senator James l.. Coke, attor-
ney. and Commissioner w. T. Garden
have arranged TO walk the downtown
streets tonight on q journey of investi.
cation.
Lights kept up BY the Honolulu Gas
Company, Ltd, are to be the subject OF
study. for upon the decision of the
utilities commission may hinge the
question OF whether or not the Gas
Company will be asked to furnish free
so street lights for the city of Homo
lulu.
Garden has already rendered an on.
tiifen On the status uf the iignts In
July Of last year, acting as deputy at
torney-generaI, he filed an opinion that
''if the company is engaged in fur
nishing Illuminating gas for lighting
sidewalks even though the light fur
nished be supplied from some other
contrivance rather than lamp post,
the company would, under the terms
of Section sos, Revised Laws of Ha-
wall, be liable to furnish free, the
street lights provided for in Section
90s.
Commission Must Decide
At the conclusion of the opinion
Garden passed the buck" up to the
commission by stating that the ques-
tion of whether the gas company is
thus engaged is for the commission it.
self to decide.
Garden, at the time of filing the op-
inion, was not member of the utili-
ties commission. He was acting then
In his Office as territorial attorney.
When the question came UP for dis
cussion yesterday afternoon, however,
he expressed the belief that SO long
as lights are outside of windows and
over sidewalks they are lighting
streets.
Chairman Forbes had already voic-
ed the opinion in his report that these
lights are merely used for advertising
purposes or for lighting windows, and
as long as they are under awnings
they are not street lights.
coke's Letter Is Read
Attorney Coke's letter to the COM
mission, which was read at the meet
ing. referred to the opinion rendered
by Garden as deputy encouragement,
and concluded:
Il beg to say that an opinion upon
this subject was rendered to your
commission on July 1, 1916, by w. T..
Garden, Esq, deputy attorney-general,
which opinion was approved by l. NJ
Stainback, Esq, attorney-generaL This
opinion construes the question of law
involved and of course leaves the ques-
ton of fact involved to be detefmin-
ed by the commission.
1T appears from the report before
me that the Gas Company is not light
ing the streets, roads, or other places
designated in Section 998 and defined
in the opinion of Mr. Garden. If am
correct in assuming that your commits
sion so finds, then the liability to fur
nish free so street lights has not been
incurred by the Gas Company
Coke Has Own Opinion
The contention of the company's at
torneys has been that so long as
lights are not on poles they are not
properly street lights This conten-
ton is borne out personally by Sen
ator Coke. The section says IN part:
said W.. w. Dimond shall also have
the right to erect and maintain lamp
posts or other appliances for lighting
streets, roads, or other places and of
connecting the same with the supply
pipes: provided that such use of said
streets, roads, or other places shall
first be approved by said superinten-
dent of public works: provided further,
that If said w. w. Dimond shall manu-
facture and supply Illuminating gas,
as well as gas for fuel, and shall erect
lamp posts as aforesaid, he shall, on
requisition of the superintendent of
public works, furnish free of cost gas
for so street lights, and thereafter
shall each year furnish FIVE more in
addition to the number furnished the
preceding year"
Coke bases his argument on the part