The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1901-04-03
DEPENSARY BILL DQ0MEDLHEALIH BOARD R[BUKED.
Ceuo esvd moII penunuoo)

Ceuo eSvd moIJ psnunuoO)
was rushed through the legislature at
it's session of 1892 with little or no dis
cussion and in the absence of the very
information as to its previous experience
which we deem so essential. 1t was
amended at the two succeeding sessions
and it's attempted enforcement has in
the meantime given rise to endless liti-
cation, serious riotlng and even loss of
life. The existing police force of the
state was founu utterly ineffective in
carrying out its provisions and spe-
cial constabulary was appointed for
t.that purpose by the Governor SO Bit
ter and strenuous was the opposition
in some quarters that the members of
| this special force were armed with ri
| fles to enable them to enforce the law,
and the militia were requisitioned to
supplement their efforts-a striking
| commentary on American liberty;
! proving conclusively that the law was
in conflict with public sentiment At
all times a strong force of constabulaTy,
! which may be augmented by the Gov
ernor is everywhere at work ferreting
out violations of the law, watching rail-
| road stations, steamboats, landings, eX-
press offices and other avenues of COM
merce. Barrels and boxes apparently
containing -four groceries and other
| for liquor, much to the annoyance of
/
d, the owners.
Fourth. Having learned from ex-
! tensively signed petitions that large
number of the electors are opposed to
this law, we deem 1t expedient that OPP
portunity be afforded for full and free
discussion and to gauge public opinion
here more particularly by reason of the
fact that the time of the last Terri
torial elections, the liquor question was
not .mooted in any party platform. To
enact under these circumstances a law
so radical and far reaching in its effects
without first giving the electors an OPP
portunity to express themselves there
on would be unduly arbitrary.
Fifth. The Supreme Court of the
State of South Carolina has rendered a
majority decision that the dispensary
law, as existing in that state IS uncon-
stitutional. This was afterwards re-
versed by a change in the personnel of
the bench. The United States Supreme
Court has declared that these provi-
sions of the South Carolina dispensary
law which forbid citizens of the state
to import liquors for their own use are
in contravention of the Interstate
Commerce laws of the United States
Constitution, and therefore invalid. But
the question as a whole has yet to be
passed upon by that last named tribu-
nal. Therefore, while the matter is sub
JUDGE, we think it inadvisable to add a
similar law to the Statutes of this Ter
ritory.
sixth. The unrestricted manufac-
: ture of wine and beer would, it is
thought. be liable to abuse, as it would
be impracticabe to watch the disposal
of the entire product which would
emanate from no uefinite service. The
limiting of the percentage of profit
would reduce prices below their pres
ent standard and might therefore be
expected to increase the consumption.
This view is confirmed by the expert
ence of South Carolina, where statistics
show an enormous increase in the con-
sumption under the dispensary law, the
sales having increased from about $780,
600 in 1894 to 81, 421, $40 last year The
condemnation of liquors by the Board
of Health would preclude it's purchase
by the Government and would have the
effect of throwing it upon the hands OF
the producer, whose only legal alterna-
tive would be the export of it. Find
ing no renumerative foreign market
available, which we think probable, a
premium, would thereby be offered to
illicit selling. While the maintenance
of any club house or like place for the
distribution of intoXicants for profit is
expressly prohibited we believe it would
be found impossible in many cases to
detect this offense, which might be eX-
pected to be largely carried on in pri-
vate dwellings.
seventh. The tourist traffic in these
islands is an increasingly prominent
feature of local commerce and the eff
feet upon it of a dispensary system
such as that proposed must not be lost
sight Of We are convinced that this
traffic would be seriously hampered
thereby as the typical tourist. out fol
pleasure and recreation, will not sub
NIT to be deprived of his customary
stimulant served in the way he has
been familiar with; and the result viii
be that a very large PROPORTION of the
tourist travel will be diverted into Other
channels. In this way trade conditions
so largely dependent thereon will be
disturbed, involving financial constric-
lions.
Eighth. 1t is our opinion that the
sum of 5000, 900 which 1t Is proposed tC
appropriate in order to give effect to
the provisions of this law would not be
adequate for that purpose or even near
ly so. 1t might possibly be sufficient
to cover the purchase of stock, the en-
ployment of officials and incidental eX-
penses, but ii would not defray the eX-
penses of additions to the police force
if these were fround necessary upon
anything approaching the scale INA:
they have been i'm South Carolina. But
above all when counting the cost, tie
question of compensation must not be
lost sight of. Such eminent jurists as
Bradley, Field. Cooley, Brewer and
other Judges of the United States Su-
preme Court have declared in language
the manner of which cannot be mis-
taken that vested interest cannot be
ignored; that the vested right of prop
erty cannot be interferred with unless
due compensation be given and that
when such rights stand in the way of
the public government they can only be
removed by awarding compensation to
the owner.
I'VE recommend therefore that the
bill be postponed pending the collection
of exact statistical information of ex-
periences elsewhere, and to enable the
electors to give an expression of opin-
ion on so important a question.