Newspaper Page Text
&S ' M cm w I W kk ,v x fey &L" ? 5s i &. m. V BY AUTHORITY. jr. . & Mr. J. K. Burkott hat been ap pointed by the Roaul of Fducation, , School Agent for thp district of Kolon and Lihue, Island of Kuuni, in place of the Rev. J. W. Smith, deceased. -V. JAS. SMITH, Secretary. Educatidn Office, Jan. 3S3. 30 3t $j$ "Ir. Chas. KoclHu has been up- '' Vininl oil r ia Tl.t t tt T?inni intt School Agent for the district of Ha. nnlei, Island of Kauai, in place of Rev. J. W. Smith, deceased. W. JAS. SMITH, Secretary. Education Office, Jan. H, '88. 30 3t T X.l JC m. gjaiTit guTTitfin Pledgod to neither Boot noi3 Party Bat established lor the bcnt5t olCall. WEDNESDAY, JAN. 4, 1888. CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE SU PREME COURT ACT, 1887. It is to be regretted that the ar guments of counsel yesterday, be fore the Supreme Court in banco, touching the constitutionality of the Act approved November 2Gth, 1887, purporting to reduce the number of Supreme Court judges to three, have not been leported in full. The point at issue was one of the most important that could well have arisen, because the Attorney-General, in his opening statement, while disclaiming that the Act was a Government measure, admitted that its policy and intent was to in troduce changes in the constitution of the Supreme Court, its organiza tion a that time not being consi dered satisfactory to a number of members of the bar. In other words, the Bill had been introduced and promoted by certain members of the bar to legislate the Third As sociate Justice off the bench, and not for the sake of any contemplated judicial reforms. If this fact had been honestly avowed while the Bill was under discussion, public opinion might have been heard upon its policy, but the truth was carefully sup pressed, and nothing might ever have been known about it, except to those in the secret, if it had not been for the Attorney-General's open and candid admission. If it were not a ministerial measure, it $i certainly ought to have been one, because no more serious question could be submitted to any Legisla ture than one affecting the constitu tion and status of the Court of last resort. As a matter of fact, a very bad effect has already been created at home and abroad among capitalists and the investing classes generally, by the indiscreet tamper ing with the judiciary at the extra session, apparently for political and .personal ends and not for reasons of public necessity or security. The arguments on the whole were able although somewhat technical. The Attorney-General took the ground that the Chief Justice and first and second associate justices hold ofllce under the Constitution .while the third associate justice, to whose presence on the bench excep tion had been taken, had only a sta tutory appointment and could there fore bo removed by legislative enact ment. The action of the United States Congress in 1802, in reducing the judicial districts of the Federal Union from sixteen to seven, was relied upon to show the superior power of a Legislature. Although Judge Story and other commenta tors condemned this proceduro as unconstitutional, the fact remained that no appeal against it was taken by the displaced judges. An ex planation of this may probably be found in the unsettled condition of affairs in revolutionary times and the bitterly hostile feelings then prevailing, as well as in the charao- uter of the Administration of that .day which rendered opposition to its . .measures extremely dangerous. i It wa8 argued by Messrs. Uosa and Hatch that there was no differ ence in the status of the judges. The law of 188G, which added two associato justices to the Supreme bench, was constitutional. Com missions in the usual form had been issued under that law, and tho jus. ticcs holding those commissions could only be removed by impcach- ment. They held under tho Con- ',BtituUon during good behavior, and couid not ho legislated out of ofilce. (IMumerous cases in point wore cited 'by counsel. Mr. JlatcU further con tended that tho Act of November 26th, 1887, did not limit tho num ber of judges of the Supremo Court. If the law of 188G, were repealed by it the constitutional provision re mained, that the Supreme Court should consist of not less than a Chief Justice and two associato jus tices; it would be, howover, quite constitutional to appoint more than two associate judges. There were other points made iu argumeut on both sides, none of whloh need special mention, except perhaps one by the Attorney-General, which recognized tho prin ciple that where a vested right had been created under statute, in the nnturc of a contract between the State and an individual, that right could not bo cancelled by subsequent legislation. This prin ciple goes much further than tho Attorney-General appeared to con cede in his argument, and applies to more than one bill passed in tho extra session, notably the Govern or's and pension repealing acts. It is not our purpose, however, to argue this point. The unanimous decision of the Supreme Bench, consisting of the Chief Justice and the First and Second Associate Justices, rendered to-day, to the effect that the Act of November 20th, 1887, is unconstitu tional and thereforeforc absolutely null and void, restores the su premacy of law over faction. The process of reasoning iu the decision of the Court as delivered by the Chief Justice, and in the con curring opinions of Justices Mc Cully and Picston, was irresistible in its logical precision. The cita tion of cases showed that there was nothing to be said on the other side, as indeed Judge McCully declared to bo tho case. And the risk which property interests of the country ran in having the status of the Su premo Court Judges tampered with by the Legislature, was very point edly put by the same learned judge. The Supreme Court is now con stituted of live Judges, Justices Bickerton and Dole having taken their seats on the bench after the reading of tho decision in question. The Court is to be congratulated upon its personnel, and the country that it has been saved from the mis chief that must result from any un certainty regarding the tenure of ofllce of Supreme Court Judges or the absolute independence of tho Court itself. SUPREME COURT OF THE WAIIAN ISLANDS. HA- JAKUAUV TI'.ItM, 1888. The King vs. Testa. Judd, C. J., McCully, Preston, J. J. The question before us was re served by Mr. Justice Bickerton as follows : "On the 3rd day of January inst. an indictment was presented by the Attorney-General against the de fendant and Was duly found a true bill by the Chief Justice. "Subsequently on the same morn ing I took my, seat on the Bench and called upon the Attorney-General to present the indictment and take the defendant's plea. ' 'The Attorney-G eneral then staled that under the circumstances he must decline to present the indict ment on the ground' that by virtue of the Act of the Legislature passed at its special session, and approved Nov. 20, 1887 entitled 'An Act to repeal an Act entitled an Act relat ing to the Justices of the Supreme Court, approved October 15th, A.D. 188G, anil to re-enact the laws there by repealed,' my commission had expired and consequently that I had no jurisdiction to take the defend ant's plea. "Mr. Rosa, on behalf of the de fendant, contended that the said Act was unconstitutional and void, and I theieupon under the powers con ferred upon me by Section 83 1 of the Civil Code and of all other powers enabling me, do hereby re serve the question raised, that is to say: "Is the said Act of November 2G, 1887, constitutional or not? for the considcrationof the Court in Banco." KlCIIAIlU F. BlCKI'.HTON, Justice of the Supreme Court. January 3, 1888. Mr. Justice Bickerton was ap pointed and commissioned as Third Associato Justice of tho Supremo Court on the 28th December, 188G. The Act of 20th November, 1887 repeals iu terms the Act of 1880, in pursuance of which Justice Bicker ton was appointed, and re-enacts certain statutes which by that Act were repealed tho intention of the Act of 1887 being to repeal tho existing provisions of law that tho Supremo Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and four Assooiato Justices, and to provide that it shall consist of a Chief Justice and two Associates. The Constitution, Article G5, pro vides that tho Supi erne Court shall consist of a Chiot Justice and not less than two Associate Justices. It is within tho power of the Legisla ture to increase tho number of As sociato Justices by statute. It is likewise within its power by statute to reduce again the number to not less than two Associate Jus tices, unless some appointment made under tho statute authorizing tho appointment of more than two Asso ciates shall liavo prevented this. We presume it would bo competent for tho Legislature in a contingency of there being but a Chief Justice and two Associate Justices in com mission, to enact that no further ap pointments should bo made and that they should constitute the Supremo Court. The fact that there was a Third Associate Justice in commis sion Mr. Justice Bickerton, when tho Act of 1887 was passed, raises tho question whether this Aot,which purports to destroy Ins olllcc, is constitutional. Before this Act went into effect a Fourth Associate Justice, Mr. S. B. Dole, was appointed. The Articles of the Constitution relating to the Supreme Couit are from G4 to 72 inclusive. Article 05 of the Constitution prescribes that the Justices shall hold their offices during good behavior, subject to removal upon impeachment and by tho Legislature, for cause, as fully set forth in tho said Article. This Article defines the tenure of ollice of a Justice of the Supreme Couit. It is not limited to those who happen to bo in olllcc when the Constitution was promul gated. Tho fundamental law creates the tenure, and prescribes that who ever shall lie appointed to this olllcc thereafter shall hold during good be havior. To claim that the Chief Justice and -two of tho Associate Justices shall hold olllcc by this tenure, and that additional Justices hold subject to the will of the Legislatuie, would be in effect to admit that they were not Justices of the Supreme Court. The olllcc of a Justice of tho Su preme Couit is created by .the Con stitution, which vests the Judicial Power of the Kingdom in this one Supremo Couit. The Constitution has placed this Court beyond the control of the Legislature, but adds that this Judicial Power is also vested in inferior courts over which the Legislature lias power for it can create them and preset ibc the tenure of olllcc of the judges of these courts. By the GGth Article the Judicial Power can be distri buted by the Legislature among the Supreme Court and the inferior courts, but this docs not create the ollice of a Justice of the Su preme Court, or define the tenure by which it is to be held, nor does any article of the Constitution grant such power to the Legislature. A Justice of the Supreme Court when appointed, holds his office in accordance with Article G5 of th'c Constitution, that is, during good behavior. A statute, which iu terms or by implication, prescribes' any other tenure of office would lie con trary to the Constitution. Suppose, for example, the Act of 1880 had read that the additional Justices should hold ofllce only so long as the Act remained unrepealed. It would be apparent that this would make the tenure of their ollice at the will of the Legislature, whereas, the Constitution says, they shall hold olllcc during good behavior. But a statute of this nature would be in effect what is claimed for the Act of 1887, under consideration, for it undertakes by repealing the law which authorizes his appointment to remove a Justice of the Supremo. Couit. This cannot be done, for it is not one of the methods of re moval prescribed by the Constitu tion. It is claimed that one Legislature cannot bind a succeeding one, and that since the Legislature of 188G enacted the law providing for two additional Justices, the Legislature of 1887 can repeal this law. On this question Chief Justice Marshal, of the Supreme Court of the United States says : The princi ple asserted is that one Legislature is competent to repeal any Act which a former Legislature was com petent to pass, and that one Legis lature cannot abridge the powers of a succeeding legislature. Tho cor rectness of this piinciple, so far as respects general legislation, can never be controved. But if an Act be done under a law, a succeeding legislature cannot undo it. The past cannot be recalled by the most abso lute power. When, then "a law is in its nature a ooutracl.when absolute rights have vested under that contract, a repeal of the law cannot divest these rights." Fletcher y. Peck G Craneh 87-M8. But without deciding whether the acceptance of an olllcc with a de finite term amounts to a contract, it is sufficient to say that the oiganic law of this Kingdom docs not confer upon tiie Legislature the power to legislate upon the tenure of ollice of a Judge of the Supreme Court. Ii is not a subject within its jurisdiction, and tho Legislature is not competent to pass any law abridging it. The exercise of such a power would be ultra vires. At this late day no one can se riously question tho wisdom of thus placing the Superior Judiciary in a position of complete independence of llic Executive or Legislative branches of tip Government. "Tho IndependoncG pf t-ho judic ial department of the Government is at once tho anchor of our stability, the prop of our strength, and the bhield of our defence." The State v. Jumcl 80 La. Jn TJic People ex rcl. Ballon v. Dubois, (ho Supremo Court of Illi nois hold that as thp olfipe of Cir cuit Judge is created by the Consti tution, which also fixes tho term, though tho Legislature may increase the number of circuits it cannot de prive a Judge of his oillco and com pejisation by ci eating pew Circuits of tho territory from which lie was elected, Onco elected, he holds his oillco under the Constitution, unless removed by address or impeach ment. 23 ill. 498. Tho same Couit in The People ex rcl. Ballon vs. Bangs, 24 111. 184, reiterated this principto and said of a Circuit Judgo whoso appointment was under tho Constitution: "But there is a Judge still remaining in office, Upon whom the burden of performing circuit duties in the twenty-third circuit still devolves, and whom tho Legislature have not, and could not, deprive of hisplUco by the passage of any law.' ' - Judge Story in Martin .Vs. Hub-., ter's Lessee (1 Whenton 804), in commenting upon Section 1, Article 3 of tho Constitution of the United States, which leads as does the IIo waiian Constitution, "The Judges shall hold their offices during good behavior and shall at stated times receive for their services a compen sation which shall not be diminished during their continuance in olllcc," says, "Could Congress create or limit nny other tenure of the judi cial olllcc? Could they refuse to pay, at stated times, the stipulated Baiary, or diminish it during their continuance in olllcc? But one answer can be given to these ques tions; it must bo in tho negative." In People vs. Burbank, 12 CuM foruia 378, the Supreme Court of that Stale say that "If the people declaic aud ordain in their Constitu tion that an office shall be held by a particular tenure, it would be as much a usurpation in the Legisla ture to alter that tenure as it would be in the Governor to commission for a longer period than directed by tho Legislature." In an opinion rendered hy the Justices of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts to the Governor in B. dishing 58."), they say, "If therefore the Legislature should, though inadvertence, constitute a judicial ollice, and' prescribe any other tenure than that prescribed by the Constitution, such provision in the statute must yield to the paramount authority of the Consti tution." In the Slate vs. Jumcl, 30 Loui siana, An, Part 11, 801, it was held "When a Judgo has acquired his office in the mode prescribed by the Constitution, he has a vested right in its emoluments during the term fixed by the Constitution for its duration, aud his right cannot be impaired by an act of the Legisla tuie, passed during said term, abolishing the olljce." But it may be contended tiat though the Act of 1887 under con sideration is inoperative to remove Mr. Bickerton from his olllcc as a Justice of the Supiemc Court, it has shot n him of his functions as a Judge and his judicial power is gone. But power, judicial author ity and jurisdiction constitute the ollice of a Judge, and arc of the es sence of it and inseparable fiom it, and the oflicc cannot remain and the functions be severed from it. If a Judge at all he has all the poweis of a Judge. Commonwealth vs. Gamble G2 Pa. 313, reported in American Re ports 423, is a stiong authority on this point. Here the Legislature established the 29th judicial District by Act of 28 Feb., 18G8, under which Judge Gamble was elected and commissioned President Judge of the district. By an Act passed March 10, 1809, the former Act was repealed and the district abolished ; Ileld that the Act of 18G9 was in valid, as being an attempt, substan tially to abolish the ollice of the President Judge of the 29th district. Says the Courtt the term of the' judicial ollice is fixed by tfoe Constitution and it is beyond tho power of the Legislature to diminish it. The power, author ity and jurisdiction of an office are inseparable from it. I lie Legisla ture may diminish the aggiegate amount of duties of u Judge by a division of his district, or otherwise, but must leave his authority and jurisdiction pertaining to the office intact." The ofllce of a Justice of the Su preme Court is created by tho Con stitution as is also its tenure and its amenability, and this excludes all other modes, and it must follow that any legislation which, infringes upon inesc is unconsiHuiiuiiui aim invalid, and wo thereforo hold that tho Act in question is unconstitu tional and void, and Mr. Justice Bickerton had that jurisdiction to take the plea of tho defendant. A. F. Join), Chief Justice Supremo Court, Attorney General Ashford for the crown ; Rosa and Hatch for the de fendant. Honolulu, Jan. 4, 1888. McCully, Justick. In stating my concurrence with tho opjnion of tlie Court as delivered by the Chief Justico, it is not neces sary to go over tho wliolo ground as it lias been discussed, or to re-state the authorities quoted, or quote fur ther authorities iu support of the re sult' wo have arrived at. This iB not a case in which there is any conflict of authorities. The Act of J88G required tlmt tg constitute tho Supreme Court thpro should be a Chief Justico and four Associato Jiibtices. Ait. 05 of tho Constitution iu prescribing that the Supremo Couit shall consist of a Chief .Justico and not Jess than tiro Asspcjatp Justices plainly provides for the creation pf moro than two Associate Justices by statute, I$ljt when a statute is enacted requiring moro than two Associato Justices and such additional JubUccs have boon commissioned llioybccoino Jus tices of "the Supreme Com I. How then can it bo considered that tho Constitution does not apply to tliom ? By Art. G5 Justices hold their offices during good behavior, subject to re moval by impeachment or upon reso lution of two-thirds of the Legisla ture for good causo shown, after a trial before the Legislature. These terms exclude d power of removal by any other method. The Constitution controls the Leg islative power, and when this has limited and prescribed the methods by which a Justico of tho Supreme .CQirrt'inay be removed from. -ofllce, His no'twitliin tlie 'povfer'&'niib'Leg:' islaturc to remove him by another method. But the Act of 1887 direct ly removes from oillco nny third or fourth Associate Justice holding a commission on tho 31st day of De cember. It therefore conflicts with the Constitution. The Act of 1887 was within the Legislative power to enact provided there had been no existing appointments under the Act of 1880. The Constitution' requiring but threo Justices of the Supremo Court, no more nocd be required by tho statutes! which carry out the i equipments of tltc Constitution. When the statutes enact that there shall be more than three, it is neces sary for tho legal constitution of the Court that the required number shall bo commissioned. It is not essential that the whole number shall sit in every case or in any case. The de cisions of a majority of the justices arc final and conclusive, Art. 09. Bv.Art. 10 no person shall sit as a judge iu any case in which ho or his relative may have any pecuniary interest. Sickness or temporary ab sence from the kingdom, niay4ikc wise prevent tho silting of al.the justices. If a majority sit and a majority agree in the decision of the case, there is a valid decision of a legal com t. Yet the court requires for its legal status the whole number of justices to be in commission. Being in commission tho doctrine of vested rights applies. Absolute rights have vested in the holder of the appointment for life or good be havior, subject to removal only by prescribed methods, for impeachable cause or for other cause which a two thirds of the Legislature shall find sufficient and the king satisfactory Art. 05. Insanity or physical disability to perform duty may be instanced as grounds for the latter procedure. It is not conceivable that the ollice can be abolished without a violation of tlie vested rights of the Justice so ousted. The supposable continuance of his salary does not satisfy his rights. lie has a right to the powers aim honor of the ollice for tlie term for which he was elected or appointed. AVc arc' brought by every course of reasoning to the jSame result, namely that the appointments under tlie Act of 1880 are" brought under the provisions of the Constitution that they cannot bo distinguished from the appointments which tlie Constitution prescribes shall as a minimum be made. , A conclusion to the con.tr.iry would be in conflict with all the authorities and unsupported by valid reasoning. PnisTON, Jusi'tcn. I concur in the opinion delivered by the Chief Justice and, in the de claration that the-Act in question is unconstitutional and therefore void, and have but little to add. It was argued by the Attorney General that as the offices of third and fourth Associate Justices were created by an Act of the Legislature therefore the offices might be abolish ed by another Legislature lepealing such law, and he also contended that such olllces were held by virtue of such law only. But he conceded that if the offices were held by virtue of the law and under the constitution, .the law in question would be unconstitutional. Article Go of tho Constitution of Kumehamcha V. provides that tlie Supremo Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and not less than two Associate" Justices, and that the Justices shall hold their olllces dur ing good behavior, subject to re moval by impeachment, etc. Article GG provides that the tenure of office in tlie inferior courts shall bo such as shali bo defined by tlie Jaw creating them. T))o Legislature by the law of 188G, having. fulj authority to do bo, eimctcd that tlie Supreme Court should consist of a Chjcf Justico and Four Associato Justices. Mr. Justice Bickerton was sip pointed Third Associate Justico muter this Act on tuo zotu lJecem ber, 1880, and thoreupon became a Justice of tho Supreme Couit, the only couit established' by tho Con. stitution, and consequently held his office under the Section, G5, aud sub ject only to removal in terms of such Bection. Tins Kingdom had obtained by the Constitution of Kamehnmeha the 3rd and by that of Kamehaineha the 5th, a tenure of ollice for the Jus tices of tho Supreme Court free and independent from tho control of tlie Crown and the Legislature, a posi- on which had only been obtained n soino other countries after years of agita(ipn and struggling with the Crown, and it would be tp my opi nion, a blow to tho independence and integrity of tho Justices of this Court, if it could bo considered an open (piestion as to tlie power of the Legislature to interfere with or iu any way alter tho tenure of their Sllftps,' ' Tlie new Constitution in Aitlelo 05 adopt! tlie then existing law, and by Aitlclo 81 declares that "All olficers of this kingdom nt tho time this Constitution shall take effect shall have, hold and exercise all the power to them granted," thry being required to lake an oath to support the Constitution within sixty days from its promulgation. It therefore seems to me that, the positi6n'"of Mr. Justico Bickeiton was recognized by the Constitution. I cannot in conclusion say moro than that great and learned Judgo, Chief Justice Marshall, in the caso of Marbury v. Madison, "The Con stitution is either a superior, para mount law,, unchangeable by ordi iiaVy fifeans.-or itrigtma-lcrel Vith" ordinary legislative acts, and, like other acts, is alterable when .the Legislature shall please to alter' it. "If the former part of the alter native be true then n legislative act contrary to the Constitution is not law ; if the latter part be true, then written constitutions arc absuid at tempts on the pait of the people to limit a power jn its own nature llliti mitablc." The Act in question is in my opinion absolutely void. Castle Hall, Mystic Lodge, ! If. (if I' N MK KM HE S the nb vt! Loihre a o r. iiiii bled i t in iiiiemiiii ce ihNcvni.ii iI'SIOh irp, a? ItiBtnlln tlou in. (I nth i nit i i a hUhinwB will come bot'oitt tin I.o Inc. liy on!c , A GAltTEVBBUG.C. C. F. Wiildiou, If. ol 11. &S. Partnership Notice. rj"UlE uiKler.ilk'iiod, each of lloiii'lulu, X O.ih , linvit lormcil a t.aitiu-r hip lo do a OMlellnit h lmslr.es on tho U. lun I nf'Oiliu, linger iliu firm irnnm of the "Mauniilim ltiincn Cmnp n y " S. M. DA3ION. GI-.0. ,1. UAMPBELL. Hon lul , Doe. 31. 1 R". 80 Ct Ooltngo To .Let. A LARGE nnd ccnvcnieiit Cotlngf, No. 18 School i-t oet, next do-rt the residence i i Hev. S. K. lii-ilmp. En q ire on the nniie!!, r of Btll Tile, phono No 71. 30 lw JUST LANDED Ex W. S. llowno AN INVOICE OF FKEMI nil For tnlo nt Lovot Bates, in lots to Eiiit. at F. A. SCHAEFER 2!) w & Co's. Yosemite Skating 3ITI Skating! Skating! Skating! "Commencing Jnnunry Gth, Every Friday Evening; ! For Ladies mid their Etcorts. Ever' ( Fr'day Evening will 1c Ucit rerfcctl.) fcclect for ludies & gentlemen. .Buntl iii. Attcudauce. jthomaFe. WALL, 1C01 froiirietor. lyr HOTICE. THE ANNUAL, MEETING of the SliioknoldiTs ol i lie Hawaiian Bell Telephone Co. N ill he he'd at the olllcc of the Com p. i y, On Saturday, Jannary 7th,.1888, at 12 o'clock noon. J. F. BROWN, Beoietary Honolulu, .Jan. 4. 88. fcOlt WANTED, BY a Japanese and wifo a situation Jinn understands horses, &c , and wifo a good'houseke' per. Apply at tills ollice. 2!) lw Boll Tol. 172 .Mutual Tel. O. Box 409. SCO. J. E. BROWN & CO., FIro Proof Slooo Building. 42 Merchant Street. AND- General Commission Merchants Gener.il Agancy for Haw'n lslundi if the Burlington and Chicago Railway Across America, Conncctiug at Boston with tho Azoroi and Madolra Through tioko'.agi anted from Honolulu Mci'diaiidlEO stored and sold on coin, mission. Consignments tolluitcd, Propi'i ties leaped, ranted and sold. LohI dociimuiiw draWn. Books tiudllod aud ndJuMcri, Accounts colli cted. Authorized collector, Mr. A. Moron. I? I NEST BRANDS OF HAI I X' JOIIllH Pun. iluUuna mid Mnluna ui puiu iu axvu ui u vusub ijv ' GOlJSALVEa & CO, 01 Queen street ... ,.... l ir . .i .... " Boats Wo take pleasure m recommending our bout, as their conMiuetlon U iho rosnl of years of study and labor in building, and handling boats aioiuul our various Island landings. Wo eluliii tlicso boats to bo superior lor islnn i ui-o to others (either built here or Imported) In ocr 1 essential points, and wo are suppor ollti this opinion by those who bavo us' ritheni, as well as by otlierswlio aie qualified to judge. They aro built for nso and durability, and not Willi the view of having tl(o benefit of future le paiis. No use no crow grained and useless Monkey Pod knees, timbers, or floors, nor stralslit wood steins Our .f.ta.mfc9;n,re alio. k- bent across without a joint oii tlie keel, autl of ii size, larger than usual lit other bo.tts, they ore also closser together, and double t Ivlted to the keel, with additional Hoots between. We have applied both strain and blows to these steam bent timbers and flud that they nre equivalent to the so called solid floors of twice the size, and are consequently les liable to bo severely bilged, and' arc easier repaired when it occurs. The gunwales in e of Oak, nnd with tlie oiilitUe plunking are Invariably in one plank from t-toni to stem. The holtllng jitrap does not go thiougli tbo keel, cutting it away at a vital point, but toggled under a .crew-bolt fastened dead wood, and hinged above so as to accommodate the pnu of hoist. Thu timbers arc not cut away for water runs, our limbers aie in the keel. We liavo also a build wide iron plate on the keel and stems of the bout which have secur ed for these boats lliclrwcll dvseivcit imputation for superior build. The model- also compares favorably with our best impoited boat, carrying their width on tlie thwart, and not on the gunwale as crank boats do, t king all the cliafe and pounding against vessels and wliaif, when dls eliaiglir. Our bent O.ik knees alo I'liiry out the requirements of the oldest and most cxpcilcnccd association known who for 70 years liavo spSred neither time nor money to pioeur. the bot surf and life boats, wherever found. During thn test of 18S1, flexibility in boats, was found to bo most issenlia'l. Tlie rela hm these knees bear to the jointless section timbers and to tho boat herself when se verely i truck, to pievent a damaging concussion or any damage, can bo letul ily seen. This quality cannot bo found in boats stilly held iu one place, and loose in another. Several naval Cap tains and Officers who have inspected tliis system pronounce it a great. Im provement over the old, as a pievcntivo from being stove in or bilged alongside when being lowered at sea, as many have been known to do tbo short floors and timber cuds lifting from the keel. An other improvement, is that wo sell these boats for S0 less than was form erly paid for this size boat here, aud it pays tlie builder and buyer better. We have on hand two 21 feet freight boats, price 230 to $250. On stocks two 18 feet freight boats, $130 lo sino A correct model of tbo 2G feet Kinan boat, 8230 to $230. Two 1G feet pleasuie, pine copper fastened clinker, weight SO lbs., oars, etc., $35 to $G0. Three various sized skiffs all kinds, $15 to $30 Also our model yacht center board sloop "Keform" all complete for pleas ure or fishing, with hooks, lines, water kegs, oars aud rowlocks, anchor aud chains, extra sails, an oil stove, and a littlo flat boat, that eiiu bt carried on deck. This is a speedy little craft, aud works second to none in our wateis. .-ho was built for pleasure with safety, to sail on her bottom, without packing around tons of ballast. Can be rigged and sail made in 15 minutes, and uuiig gcd in five. Price $275, We are also prepared to give plans and estimates of all Kinds or scows, rowing surf or sail boats, steam laun ches, or schooners, in solid, bent frame, or diagonal building. Our experience in tlie latter mode dates from 185f , when the celebrated yachts "Fox" and others were built iu that way, this vessel -was severely tried in the Arctic for 3 years under Sir J. McCliutock, when in search of Sir John Franklin. This mode of building is highly recommended where inside finish and capacity is an object. We invito inspection of our "boats at tho Enterprise Planiiig Jlill, wuuiu Humpies may uu loiinu, J. A. DOWER, J Mutual Telephone, JsTo. 325, 21 Iftew Freight FOIt SALE. g i3 P 6 m i J I CD I e- 2) O CL - fmml " o !? rri ih O S. CD 2 S1 J H O 2? U o B o - h3 R I i I P e-- I i B ? CD --GS-. uZ3 (9 C-- M ZEALAND OATS ! 9 JTOK SAlfE, NEW ZEALAND OATS OT A I Quality,' JiiBt received ox Mariposa, by J, E. BROWN & Co., 1.7 28 Moiohnnt Street, DOCTOB WEBB. Oflloo and Residence neX door to the American 3Jinsler'8 on Alakcfi street, between Hotel and Heiclaula Bir'eotx, Ofllce Iours from 7 to 9 a, u'u; fronv j iq u p. in, nuu w 10 p n in Telenhono . Telepbono QlSJui 1 ' 'p - r f "'s 3.1 7 si sffife s . 't-s . 4 t e 4 vx r. y & "t . "W. .r 4tt iifrife.f I , miji A -lm ujb&hl x&&8ttiiiu