The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1901-04-26

as TO usage which has brought the en-
tire system inso disrepute- The most
pernic1o1s Of ell the methods Of ths
license once must b that custom
which permits the wholesale liquor
dealer 10 hold q license for the sale
Of liquors IL retail Next comes the
practice of permitting q wholesaler
70 become bondsman for an applicant
for retail license In effect the lattsr
practice makes the retailer the bond
man, for he Is only the agent OF his
principal In the opinion Of members
OF this committee there should be no
such close relations permitted The
Wholesale dealer must not be allowed
TO hold the whip hand over the small
dealer, for TO such conditions may De
traced some Of the difficulties Of the
past When large dealers are permit
ted to exercise leading influence with
the licensing power, as may be traced
in some instances submitted here
with. then will the interests of the
small, the retail dealer. be lost to
sight.
OF the half dozen matters treated In
the evidence before the committee and
now in the hands Of the House. the
committee wishes to call attention TO
the case of W. C. J. Ottman, as fur
nishing the most peculiar features
In November, 1899, a light wine and
beer license. as contemplated by Law,
was issued to 0ttman. he then having
place at waikiki, more than the re-
Er.d foNa
spirituous liquor license, which in this
case was the Hawaiian hotel. The
strietness OF Minister k.ng was shown
when In measuring the legal 500 feet
from tie church, Ottman was required
to take a straight line, which left his
fence line 592 feet away, instead Of
following the road, which would have
given the necessary distance. II was
only by the waving of objection on
the part OF the church people that the
license was finally given. Then Mr..
Ottman went to the expense OF build
ing a resort at a cost OF $500. For
one year he enjoyed the use of his
property and license. Then came the
question Of renewal With the appli-
cation approved by the Marshal, the
proprietor sent in his formal request.
But a change had come over the state
OF affairs. When the light wine license
had been issued there was no license
nearer than the city proper. Spirits
were sold, ii was current rumor, on
the strength of an arrangement with
the police authorities. sort of quasi
| licensing Of two resorts, at the sea-
side. But even this was not for long.
for both Of those places secured the
necessary amount OF influence To
bring about the extension of the sa-
loon or spirituous liGaor license dis
/ trict from the downtown section to
Waikiki. and the Hotel Annex and the
| Waikiki Inn were granted full hotel
| fagrant breaches OF public proprietr
was committed. One OF the large :,
wholesale liquor houses had obtained
license for its beach hotel. another
wanted the same privilege. The gov
ernment which had forced Ottman tc
measure an air line to the church
an had waived the provision onlI
when the church authorities sanction
ed the licensing. this government
through Minister Young. who had sue
ceeded Minister King. promised to th'
promoters of a proposed new hotel ,
license. granted 1t in fact. thougl
there was not built the hotel In whicl
the license was to become operative
So the issue could not take place 70
many months after. and this was tn
third license granted within 900 fee
of a church, a plain violation Of tn
law-the location for which the Moan
hotel license was granted being almos
directly across the street from it. TIL
bugbear of Ottman was no bar to tn
influence of the hotel men with tn
minister.
, This then was the condition whe
. Ottman, viii $4,000 invested in build
ings for his resort. requested renews
; of his license, and was met with tn
: remark that there were three spiri
, licenses In the neighborhood and b
} could not expect renewal Three
censes granted in the interval of hi
: first years business under the licens
privilege originally granted to hil
r and for which he had to build special
i | a structure as above stated. He wa
r told that he would encroach on th
{ "hotels (?)," in fact that the propri
; tor of one OF these hotels had made
] protest against the renewal of b
J. license. II appears to your commitfs
n on the contrary, that the encroachmel
r was upon Ottman. and the imphe
= agreements between him and the Go
d | ernment at the time of granting hi
e his first license. He was on the grouI
o first. he had the prior right. he vi
n the legitimate owner Of the privileg
q but none of these consideration
e weighed with the conscientious Go
l. ernment which placed about him SUI
q restrictions. There was no char
II that he conducted q disorderly plaG
9. on the contrary he was commend
Ie for keeping an orderly place. but
n was simply frozen out of his busine
T. by the influences dominating the
Re censing power In any land lease I
DR. occupant may hold his rights by pa
10 ing the highest amount bid The le'
IL or, the same government. gives b
n this equity. but applying this princiI
la- TO the case in point. 1t was refused
ce the man who was minus the necesss
le. pull" the privileges were wanted
ae men closer to the licensing pow
sc and his rights were invaded and
u request dismissed without even
rit common courtesy OF being given
n opportunity OF taking what was TO
I l., a .