The Hawaiian gazette., 1889-02-19
In the Supreme Court of the Ha-
waiian Islands In Chambers.
WILLIAM r. Chiffon AND HENRY
BRADLEY VS.. LoRRIN a. THURS
TON, MINISTER OF INTERIOR.
BEFORE MI. JUSTICE DOLE.
Petition for Writ Of Mandao'us.
Decision.

The plaintiffs alleged in their peti.
ton substantially, that they are own
ers as tenants in common of the
premises known as the keystone
Saloon, situate on the westerly corner
of King and Fort streets in Honolulu;
that from August 22d, 1878, to March
18th, 1888, the said premises were con-
tinuously used for retail liquor sell
ing under licenses FROM the Minister
of Interior, during the whole of which
time the premises were owned by one
or both of the plaintiffs; that over
three thousand dollars have been
spent by the plaintiffs in fitting up
the said premises for the said bust
ness, and that by continuing such
business therein much larger in
come can be obtained from the said
premises than by any other use
thereof; that the said plaintiff, Henry
Bradley, held the license for retail
ing liquor on the premises from Aug
ust odd, 1878, until March 18th, 1888,
since which time the premises have
been leased to and the business carried
on by others; that since March 9th,
1888, the lease having expired, the
plaintiffs have applied for n license
to be issued to the plaintiff, William
r.. Chiffon, for selling liquors at re-
tail at the same premises, and have
rendered the statutory license fee and
a bond with surety to be approved by
the Minister of Interior, but that such
application has been refused, solely
on the ground that the respondent
has decided to issue no more such
licenses in said Honolulu.
BY reason whereof, the plaintiffs
claim "that they are unlawfully and
arbitrarily debarred from and de-
prived of the right of acquiring prop
erty, and that they are entitled to
have a license for the vending of spir-
ituous liqueurs at retail at said Key
stone Saloon granted by the defend
ant to said William r. Chiffon upon
his filing 4 bond with a surety to be
approved as aforesaid, and paying the
fee required by law in such cases."
and pray for a writ of mandamus to
be addressed to the respondent direct
ing him to grant such license upon
the performance of the statutory con-
ditions.
An alternative order was issued and
the respondent demurred and his de-
murrer being overruled, he filed his
answer admitting that he refused and
still refuses to issue such license to
the said William r. Chiffon, but de-
nying that he had based such refusal
solely, or at all, on the ground that he
chad decided to issue no more such
licenses in said Honolulu" The re-
spendent further alleges that he re-
fused to issue the said license for the
reasons: that the premises are on the
corner of two of the most important
and frequented streets in Honolulu,
which streets are largely occupied by
the principal retail dry goods and
other retail stores of the city, such as
are frequented by ladies; that the
said building projects a considerable
distance beyond the general line of
Fort street and that the sidewalk and
street in front of the same is narrower
than elsewhere on said streets; that
the doors to the premises open directly
from the sidewalks of the said streets
on a level Herewith,
and that the interests, comfort and
safety of those using said streets and
of ladies and children fire.
that portion of the city,
demand their exemption in that local
ity from the various natural and iii
accomplishments of retail
liquor saloon, to-wit: the presence,
profanity and general indecency of
persons and the danger
and terror of personal contact with
such persons in the said locality; that
the premises, while such trade has
been carried on therein in the
past, have continuously sustained
for carousal and drunken
ness to an extent detrimental to the
good order, peace, quiet and comfort
of the neighbOrhOod; that the carry
ing on of such business in the said
premises has proved in the past, and
would continue to prove inimical to
the business interests of the neigh
borhood and of owners of property
therein, and prejudicial to the peace,
quiet and comfort of the locality;
that in the same block in which the
said keystone Saloon is situated and
within 250feet thereof there is another
retail liquor saloon, and that within
a radius of 700 feet there are two 9TH
eTs, and two more Il short distance
beyond, so that in the interests of
those who avail themselves of the
privileges afforded by saloon there
IS no necessity for the issuance of any
,urther license in that neighborhood,
md in the interests of sobriety and
an increase in the num-
Der should not be made; that prior to
he said application for a license the
defendant received petitions numer-
,usly signed by those conducting |
business in the neighborhood of the |
aid Keystone Saloon, and other resi- |
Tents of Honolulu praying defendant |
lot to grant any further license for
he sale of liquors in the said premi- |
les, and that for these considerations |
he defendant deemed it undesirable
Il the public interest that a retail
liquor saloon should be established or
in the said premises. The
.nswer also alleges that in refusing
uch license the respondent acted in
,ood faith in the public interest and
within his discretionary power vested
IA him by law, and that for the same
easons he has refused similar appli-
ations from other parties for license
o retail liquors in the said premises.
1t was shown by the testimony
by the respondent that
esides the petitions against the
.ranting of a new license for the said
referred to in his answer, he
lad received numerous complaints
gainst the keystone Saloon and none
gainst any other saloon i'll the city,
hese complaints being mainly on the
round of HE lnnnlitr, that the uari-