The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-05-06

a''' therefore the words used to be treated as
dR TOO. and this rule of construction is whole
+ tbp interest of the public against any attempt
.n by the Insertion of ambiguous language to take
f'p' 10 obtained in clear and express TERMS" Cen
@' N , Pullman Car Co., 139 u S. 40; Charles
@F Warren Bridge, II Pet. 42O, 544-54S.
p9 .,s.on s-Has the Hawaiian Tramways Company
,.-,te its railway by electricityl
y. +, William R Austin and associates was silent as
,oror to be used in propelling the cars over the
q.a- INIT Section of the Act permits the grantee
i. rome cable operated by stationery engines as a
II any time he might elect so to do. From this
od that it was the intention of the legislature to
and his associates the right and privilege to take
:. ,rd to apply in the operation of its railway any
roJ devices in motive power that would enable this
Keen abreast of twentieth century progress and to
III time to give what the public has right to expect
a., modern, upto-date street service That any
;oD would be strained and unwarranted and would
= condemn the public to the use of "an Anticipated
y f,r the remainder of the term of the companys
This argument might appeal to the sympathy OF the
| .snft
sDe,sv in the light of the knowledge that this com
srrs legislative grant, had permission ito use and
jstrc power for moving and propelling their cars
s7 such wires which may be necessary therefor over
,,m under the highways and public roads and across
,,ers" from the 14th day of September, 1890, until
M Of January 1897, and that this privilege was not
! md wa; permitted to lapse by non-user.
eyal rule is as follows: EIt is, indeed questionable
lie silence of the ordinance upon this point will not be
70 mean that such motive power only may be used
i snmon use at the time of the enactment of the
There reason for presuming that the parties con-
my such use of the streets as was at the time or
ie by street railway companies Elliott, Roads &
Tays 561; North Chicago City Ry. Co. a. Lake
m2O7.
d the idea that electricity might be brought into
E as motive power may have been familiar to the
Aators in the year 1884, the time of the original
fnmways Company, the court will take judicial
tte fact that electricity had not at that time been
Each general use. In the absence of clear terms
nntention the part of the legislature that electric
sdd be used by this company in propelling its
ak We do not believe that we would be authorized to
ae an intention into the terms of the grant unless
In that such use would impose no additional servitude
PIT It's possible that system of storage batteries
nfmproved electric motor appliance, not familiar to
night be substituted for the present motive power
4a On this question we do not feel called upon to
ane However We are clear that the company can
of i.
at the same is applied by means of some of the well
ems now In common use, such as the overhead trolley
Underground cable system for the reason that each
lens would impose additional servtude on the pub
etaet that in Section of the Act of 1884 pernlis-
10 use wire or rope cable operated by stationary
arates conelusively either one of two things-that
aan Or other traction that would add an additional
@ street was not before the mind of the legislature
not intended to give the right to use such traction
y THIS night cannot be successfully claimed under
F7er The right if it exists at all must be based on
s' OF general knowledge that electricity is power
| force and that its use, especially on the public
l1 not be permitted unless guarded by proper and
-'Aons This purpose was plainly demonstrated
'-e IN The Act of 1895, amending the Act of 1884,
anyways Company permission to use electricity
suu The Act of 1898, granting the franchise to
and associates
'a'' the Iramways Company did not consider
''Sn' Under the Act of 1884 or that of 1886, to
. d motive power or at least that it felt great
'.''Sel 50 much doubt, in fact, that it applied to