The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1897-06-26


prevent private family from incidentally taking
than three boarder dodgers without taking license there
under.
EXEMPTION OF COUNTRY HOTELS
Section "a The Minister also in his discretion, permit
hotels at which both meals and lodgings furnished points
other than in Honolulu where they public convenience
to be carried on without license under this Act
The Minister contends that the word may" in Section
ports discretion, and he relies Bradley 4. Th~ston
Haw 523 support this contention In that the
provided that The Minister of the Interior shall power
grant licenses piruous liquors. Justice
Dole who heard the originally held that
words, shall have the power m shall lawful"
authoed our various statutes relating to licenses
prG acie import discretion and should be construed
unless the public interest the rights of third persons the
subject the other parts of the show that they
weram be mperave that there nothing in that
show that the words question meant to be Imperative
but that the contrary other parts the tended show
that the words intended confer discretion; that the
statute having conferred discretion upon the Minister 1t was
for the pass upon the suency of the for
refusing the license further than ascertain whether real
legal discretion exercised that discretion based
the grounds that might properly be considered whether it
exercised arbitrarily caprcouy and that in that
the Minister had exercised legal discretion On appeal
the Supreme Court held without setting forth the that
the decision appealed from in far it held that
discretionary power conferred on the Minister but all the
Justices exception of Mr.. Justice Dole who adhered
his original opinion further and held that the dcre
tonay power absolute and that the could
whether was exercised legally arbitrarily.
Assuming that the decision in Bradley Thston has estab-
shed the law for subsequent applicable
the opinion applicable the present
That dsingushabe from this in respect of both the sub
ect and language of the either of which,
recognized that might be such to require the word
"may'' to be construed SHALL
Take first the subject The portion of the statute
under consideration relates licenses for keeping lodging
tenement houses hotels boarding houses restaurants
paions only harmless in their but actually
welfare and of the public Such occupations
subject degree of control those which,
like that of selling Intoxicating liquors. involved in Bradley
Thston believed be harmful dangerous in Themselves
The latter be regulated restricted extent to
of prohibition The former being harmful, if at
ALL their but only from the particular in
which hev are conducted regulated only reasonable
be
The Legislature itself could contuonaly impose
reasonable arbitrary restrictions upon such pursuits; much
less could delegate snch other body
1t itself impose reasonable conditions it place consd
cradle discretionary executive officers but in the latter
should be something in the statute guide control
the action of the officers To illustrate in the if the
has discretionary from the of the word
may there nothing guide him the exercise of his dis
Such absolute discretion could not be given him. But
in Section 70 the statute requires condition of obtaining
that the applicant shall first procure certificate from the
Board of Health certifying that the premises good ani
tary condition and suitable be used for the desired purpose
stating number of persons that be lodged therein. It
Board Health agents
discretion in these particulars but these conditions that
reasonably be imposed respect of lodging houses and the
f orc limited IN bo xerso Of their discretion to these
That the decision in Bradley Thtrson made with
reference this distinction between occupations harmful in
themselves and those harmful in themselves or,
occupations that be pursued of right
and those which may be pursued only as matter OF privilege
clear only from the of the authorities there cited
of which related liquor licenses but from the fact that
all the Justices who took part that decision had already
cognzed this distinction in opinion in which, far any
Grade business occupation lawful ITSELF concerned
they answered in the the question them by the
Legislature, "as the Legislature under the Constitution
law making unlawful for
trade business occupation without license, and giving
designated person body absolute discretionary authority
grant, refuse grant, such censes?' Re Licenses Haw
III That opinion, it true, contains which
inconsistent with the views forth this decision
the application of the principle question: but perhaps
they be explained by reference the authorities which
they be based and which entirely consistent with
the views here set forth.
In Republic Lee Haw. 491, the provided
that T shall be lawful for and the Minister of the Interior
hereby authorized and empowered to to be built
sufficient number of aundre and wash houses and to let the
applying therefor and made it penal oense
cary the business of laundry keeping washing for hire
except in such buildings The laundry business