The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1896-05-19

legislative act must have a reasonable
construction. Thst which is implied
| in a statute is SIS much part OF II as
what is expressed. Thomas V. Norton
5 Hsw. 90,
In woodforth v The State, the Court
Ssvs. that the rule for the construc-
ton of statutes which limits the
meaning Of words Of general descrip-
ton to persons OF things within the
class or classes designated by preced-
Ing words Of particular description. can
be used only as an aid in ascertainins
the legislative intent, and not for the
purpose of combining the operation or
statute within the limits narrower than
those intended by the law maker. II
affords q mere suggestion 10 the judi
cisl mind that. where il clearly appears
that the law maker was thinking of 8
particular class of persons or objects.
his words Of more general description
may not have been intended to embrace
those not within the class. The sug-
geStion is one of common sense. Other
rules of construction are, however,
equally potent, especially the primary
rule. which suggests that the intent of
the legislature is to be found in the or
binary meaning OF the words of Ae
statute Another well established prin-
ciple is. that even the rule requiring
the strict construction OF q penal sta
cute as against the prisoner (and in his
favor literally is not violated by Civ
ing every word OF the statute its full
meaning. unless restrained by the con-
text" The statute construed reads;
That If any person shall abuse any
Judge or justice of the peace; resist or
abuse any sheriff, constable, or other
oTior in the execution Of his office, :"
etc The Court held that supervisor
OF roads and highways" was within the
meaning of other officer" snd that
the Legislature intended that the gen
eral words should have a broader sig
MITIGATION and embrace officers not OF
the particular character of those named
in the statute That it is not intended
20 ignore the rule which requires penal
I statutes as against the prisoner TO be
construed strictly and in his favor lib
orally. But il does prevent q construc-
/ ton as against him, so strict, or in his
/ favor, 50 liberal. as 70 defeat the OBJ
vious intention Of the Legislature
The words OF this statute. or other
officer when viewed in the light of
their ordinary meaning. and of all the
rules or maxims for construction, and
the mischief TO be remedied. to-wit,
abuse or resistance TO public officers
engaged in the execution of their Offices,
we think should be construed TO en-
brace ministerial as well as judicial
Offices generally other than those
named"
woodforth '. The State. % Oh. ST,
1ss.
Foster '. Blount, IS Ala, 6Ss. cited at
length in Sutherland on Stat Con-
struction. Sec. $50.
The mischief 10 be remedied being
the violation Of deeency and good NOR
ais by the use of profane and obscene
language in an open place where the
same can be heard by the public or peo-
pie who may be passing on q public
street, the intent Of the Legislature was
not TO restrict the words 'or other pub
lie place" in their meaning TO the par
Iicular words street, highway. store or
shop" and similar words. but 10 give
them general meaning and q place
becomes public according 10 circum-
stances, its accessibility to the public
and It's location in regard 10 public
streets. and the mischief 10 be pre-
vented. and in this case We hold that
the place where the language was used
was 2 public place within the meaning
Of the Act
Appeal is dismissed.
". o. Smith. Atty. Gen, for prosecu-
ton: G. A Davis for defendant.
Honolulu, Nay 9Th. 1895