The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1876-01-29
Supreme Court Of the Hawaiian Islands
January Term.

The prisoner Yet Sing Is indicted Cor selling opium.
contrary 10 the provisions Of section J ~ the act OF
August 9Th. 1874. entitled IAN Act 70 rcs,rioi the
Importation and sale o. Opium" Section I of this
act makes a penal oaense. the importing. ssllIag.
giving or furnishing opium or any preparation there
Of TO Any person In this Kingdom ;srcspt a. provided
for In section 2, Of the act The second seciiou an-
thoriEes the importation Of opium by the Board Of
Health and is sale by this Board TO duly graduated
and licensed physicians aud surgeons Its objected
by the counsel Cor the prisoner that the act above re-
fcrred 10 is Unconstitutional aud void. because is
ffls doe. no, express all the objects u the act; aud
( IL Is therefore an enactment contrary 10 the 18th aru-
Gle u the constitution which reads Ito avoid
improper insuenees which result FROM i%nisrmiring
10 one aud the same act. such thibgs as have no pro-
per relation 10 each other. every Law shall embrace
ba, one object. aud that shall be expressed In Ice
title"
Tho prisoner being indicted ior the onense of ssll.
log opium, and the title u the act. reading An
Act TO restrict the Importation aud sale Of Opium"
il is clear that 20 far As the oncnso Of selling opium
is concerned tho act is no broader than Ice tito.
The general authority Of the Legislature 60 eror-
else is police power and to prohibit the importation
and sale Of any article which In the exercise Of Ice
wisdom IL deems 20 be dcle,erious 10 the Pebble
Health IL not questioned.
This section Is deemed 10 be demonstrations Cor
the further reason that IL makes the sale 81 opium q
penal onrnsc. whereas by other laws % the Kingdom
(acts Of 1860. aud acts Of 1874. chap 3s) the imPor-
tation and sale Of opium by licensed dealers was
authorized. and therefore this law Is - Retrospective"
aud void. being contrary 10 article 10 Of the oonsti-
tuition, which declares that N retrospective laws
shall ever be enacted
A complete answer 10 this objection IL the fact that
the opium which this prisoner was convicted Of ceiling
was proven AT tho trial 10 have been bought by him
some two months before the sale 81 which be was
convicted. and at that date the Law which authorized
the sale Of opium by licensed dealers was not In ioroe.
but had become ~abrogated by the Law under Discus
sion. Moreover. the sale Of opium by any other
than licensed dealers or Physicians was forbidden by
tho former laws above referred 20.
Section I, therefore, 81 the act under which this
prisoner 10 indicted and convicted IL constitutional,
and the court will not listen 10 objections made by
him, as 10 the unconstitutionaliy q other parts Of
this act, for his rights arc no, involved any further.
lie can only inquire whether his conviction 10 under
n constitutional law.
The prisoner .driu IL indicted under section . Of
this act, which reads "Auy person who shall have
Ia his possession opium, or any preparation thereof
which he shall not have received from the Board OF
Health or from q duly licensed Physician or Surgeon
as prescribed In section Y. OF this act, shall forfeit
such opium or preparation thereof TO the Hawaiian
Government, and the same shall be seized and de-
livered TO the Board Of Health. and such person
shall be imprisoned for a term Of not p,ore than one
year, with or without hard labor In the discretion OF
the court"
This Section In also claimed 10 be unconstitutional,
because " Retrospective"
H. -. .....i -os... Ar. (.l..e. nm tna uart ~ fha
prisoner to show that this opium which he had Ia hs
possession had been purchased from a duly licensed
dealer in opium while tho law authorizing Il was In
force.
But why may not one Legislature declare Illegal q
traffic which a previous Legislature had sanctIonedf
Such u law IL not strictly Z" Retrospective" Il does
not impair any " vested right for The privilege OF
importing opium by a licensed dealer, while IL existed.
was n statutory privilege and lasted for but one year,
as was also the right 10 soil opium 70 a ohinaman,
and the law Is settled that n statutory privilege 10
not a vested right.
The effect Of the principle commended for by the
prisoners counsel would be 10 prevent the Legislature
Of this Kingdom from repeating any Of the existing
license laws and from prohibiting The exercise Of any
particular traffic now licensed; az In the case Of
spirits for example, the trade Ia which Ia now licensed.
but which the next Legislature might deem burtful
10 the community and wish TO prohibit.
On grounds Of public policy the Legislature for
merly thought IL wise aud proper 10 restrict the Inn
~portation and sale Of opium by allowing this privi-
lege 10 two licensed dealers ia Honolulu al a high
charge, and they made the further restriction that IL
could be cold only 10 Cinnamon: the Act o. 1874
restricts the importation and sale Of this drug still
further by comforting this privilege upon the Board
Of Health alone.
This law 10 not unjust or opprcssve Ia this regard,
for IL gave one years notice before IL went into opcr-
alton. and this period the Legislature considered 10
be ample time In which all parties having opium In
their possession could rid themselves Of the article.
The case presented is not that Of the licensed
dealers. under the state Of facts OF the Legislsturs
by one law authorizing them TO import opium aud
then by another law making the possession Of this
opium a penal oHense and the opium liable 10 con6s-
cation; for n, without due and reasonable notice 10
them, their property thus legally acquired and hold
should be conGscated, they might perhaps have just
grounds for presenting . claim for indemnity 10 the
Legislature.
But II is claimed that Seetion ID Of this ACT IN
unconstitutional and void because there 10 nothing
in the title Of the Act 10 indicate that the possession
Of opium is punishable; aud that this Section, be-
cause broader than the title, should fall.
II is only necessary that the title Of an Act should
express it's object, l. e. the purpose for which Il 10 In
tended, and Il IL not necessary. that every provision
Of the Act should be indicated Ia the title, for that
would require the title 10 be A. full and c0mprehen-
give as the Act itself Il 10 sufficient n the Section
under contention in truth carries out the object Of
the Act itself
The object Of the Act Is declared by the title TO be
the restricting of the importation and sale Of opium,
md this section q. Furnishes tho having Of tho
opium in possession. which tends absolutely and d-
rectly 10 restrict its importation and sale. II 10 true
that the Section was intended also 10 have the effect
Of preventing the use Of opium; bat though this
may be one Of the legitimate effects of this Section
and perhaps lie most obvious intention, IL IL not un-