The Daily bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Hawaii]) 1882-1895, 1889-03-16
SPlRlTUOUS LIQUORS.
IMPORTANT DECISION BY THE COURT

OPINION OF .aE COURT PER MIR, Jus- ]
TICE M'CULLY.
The defendant appeals from con-
victon IN the Police Court OF Homo
lulu for keeping on his premises in
Honolulu on the 9th of November,
1888, on King street, five gallons of
spirituous liquor to wit: of Madeira
wine and beer, contrary to the pro-
visions of Section l of Chapter G7
of the Acts of 1888, the defendant
being licensed storekeeper.
The defendant admitted the facts
charged but claims that they do not
constitute q criminal offense under
the Constitution and laws of the Ha-
waiian Islands.
The statute is entitled San Act
to better prevent illicit traffic in
spirituous liquors."
Section l is as follows; sit shall
be unlawful from and after the pas
sage of this Act, for any person or
persons conducting or carrying on
any business or trade Tor the carry
ing on of which license is required
by the Government, or for any other
person except druggists, physicians,
and licensed dealers in spirituous
liquors, to have or keep or permit
on or about the premises where such
business or any portion thereof is
carried on, or where any portion of
the stock used or kept for such busi-
ness is stored, ANY spirituous liquors,
except for the use of those engaged
on the premises, and which shall not
exceed at any time one-half gallon
of wine or beer, or one quart of ar
dent spirits. The definition of the
term spirituous liquors herein shall
be the same rs is contained in Sec
tion 2 of Chapter LNIV of the Laws
of 1882"
1t is strongly contended by de-
PENDANTS counsel that the section
has no sensible and consistent mean
ing, and that the strict reading of
its clauses yields only absurdities.
1t cannot be denied that the sta
tute is SO lacking in plain meaning
that it requires close examination to
determine what is herein enacted.
What scope and effect is to be
given to the words ''for any other
person except" etc? If we make 8
parenthesis about the excepted mat
ter the thing said is that no person
holding a license and no other per
son shall keep or suffer to be KEEP
on the business premises of u Licensed
any spirituous liquors. Druggists
physicians, and licensed dealers il
spirituous liquors are excepted
They are not prohibited from keep
ing spirituous liquors on any licens
ed premises either their own or o
other persons. On the other hanC
the licensec shall not permit an,
person to keep liquor on his pre-
misses, druggists, etc., not excepted
The most favorable Interpretation
which will support the statute ant
conform to the supposed intention
of the Legislature, it being presum
ed not to intend absurdity, is tina
these three excepted classes are eX
cepted from drawing the penalty OF
one who permits them to do wha
the law allows them to do, or W
may adopt the Interpretation that a
the three excepted classes have pre-
misses of their own, it is intende
that they may keep spirituou
| liquors on their own premises, mere
: ly by applying literally the ruI
, reddendo Simgula sing"liS. Neithe
of these interpretations is quit
> satisfactory to us. But as the Cas-
v before us does not touch anythin
e in this exception we may pass b
: the difficulty,
The counsel for defendant col
tends that the latter part of Il
section must be taken to mean th
it shall be unlawful for any persc
J. except druggists, etc., to keep spi
ituous liquors on his premises II
less it shall exceed the prescrib,
amount, but we do not find the diff
Guilty in giving the second exceptil
clause reasonable meaning. 1t
a an appendage. If the senten
e closed with period after "aI
= spirituous liquors." there would
d total prohibition. Now there
n added "except (spirituous liquor
t. for the use of those engaged on Il
I, premises, and which (spirituo
n liqurs) shall not exceed" etc. II
h words we have added in bracke
s. are not requisite to supply omissio
e or deficiencies what is "cxcept
8 for use" can mean nothing el
h than the Immediately preceding su
). jcct, and the relative pronOun /
Is fers to its nearest antecedent.
e With the view that the statu
N certainly enacts that the holders
it business licenses shall not Ike
is spirituous liquors on their premis
le except a specified small quality
J. personal use, is the Act dnconstit
N tional? The first section is CO..
it pIete in itself so far as describi
I'd and enacting certain unlawful az
at The penalty for this is contained
nj the sixth section which in y genel
t, way prescribes penalty for I
ht violation of any provision Of the A