The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1888-12-04

Mandamus to Issue License to the Key
stone Saloon Standardization by
Judge Dole Gives the Minister Dis
! erection.
Judge Dole yesterday filed a second
decision in the Keystone Saloon license
matter His former decision over-ruled
the demurrer of the respondent, the Min
lister of the Interior, to the alternative
| order to issue the license or show cause
why he should not do 80. William R.
Chiffon and Henry Bradley, petitioners
for the writ, had alleged that they were
owners or tenants in common of the Key
stone premises; that from Aug. %, 1873,
till Mar. -, 1888, these premises were
continuously used for retail liquor selling,
under licenses from the Minister of the
Interior: that during the whole Of that
time the premises were owned by one or
both of the plaintiffs that over $4,000
had been spent in fitting the place up as
q saloon that license had been again
applied for with fee rendered, but that
such application has been refused solely
on the ground that the respondent has
decided to issue no more such licenses in
Honolulu" and that by such refusal
plaintiffs are denied their legal rights,
etc.
To the alternative order the Minister,
respondent, filed his answer, denying
that his sole reason for refusing the IL
cense had been his decision to issue no
more such licenses. He gives as reasons
for N VcaFf1 al hot Ha
the corner Of two of the principal streets,
which on account of having the principal
dry goods stores are much frequented by
ladies and children; that the building
projects beyond the general line Of Fort
street and its doors open directly on the
sidewalks; that the other business in
terests OF the locality have suffered from
the contiguity of this saloon and, to-
gether with the ladies and children
trequentlng those streets, are entitled
to the use of the Minister'S discre-
ton in protecting them from sucn an
establishment at that point; that there
Is another saloon in the same block,
within $50 feet, and several other
saloons within radius of 700 feet; that
a petition had been received against
granting the license, from many of the
property holders in the vicinity and
other residents, and 80 on. Evidence |
had, moreover, been given showing that |
had been frequent against |
this saloon on account of its locality, and |
from being rendered noisy by drunken |
men particularly when Warships are In |
port.
The Court in taking the case up be-
gins with the question as to the discre-
ton of the Minister of the Interior.
From the wording of the statute, viz,
The Minister of the Interior shall have
he power to grant licenses to retail
'pirituous liquors." etc., Judge Dole rea-
sons that the Minister is left discretion,
put only on behalf of clear public inter
ssts or the superior rights of third
parties. He concludes thus:
Having decided that the law gives
he Minister of the Interior a discretion
n the matter, it is not for the Court TO
,ass upon the sufficiency of the reasons
# the respondent for refusing the license
n question, further than to ascertain
whether he exercised real discretion |
n the matter-that is, conclusion
ased upon public grounds which he
ad right to consider as an executive
thcer sworn to execute the law, or
7hether he acted arbitrarily, from
aprice or prejudice, and consider an
nicer under the circumstances may act
rom lofty public motives and still be
Inside Of his discretion, as, for instance,
ne should refuse such q license be.
ause he believed all traffic in LIQUOR to
Q injurious to the public. The grounds
pom which the respondent claims to
ave acted have been stated above. and
consider that there are among them
'asons which may properly appeal to
le official discretion of the respondent. r
!" The complaint Is therefore dismissed a
ith COSTS"
A. 8. Hartweil for the plaintiff; At.
rney- General @. W. Ashford for the :
spondept.