The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1901-01-24
MAY SMOKE
PEACtfU LLY
Joy for the Slaves of
The Pipe.
THE OPIUM LAW is PAU
Circuit Court Declares Anyone May
Have the Drug Legally in
Possession.

l-r in Honolulu feel that he is likely 10
be swooped down upon by Depa;y Saer-
if Chillingworth and hailed into court 10
be fined $50 lore or less, for having
opium in possession" The law which
provides a penalty for those who are
caught with opium in their possession
met a legal death yesterday at the
hands of the First Judge of the First
Circuit Court, who declared that the law
was unconstitutional and in direct con-
.traVention to the decision of the United
States Supreme Court.
The Celestial who doZes amid the
fumes of his favorite dream-producing
drug, can doze and doze without any
fear that the police will disturb him, for
the Judge has stated that the law by
which he has been bounded night after
night ceased to be operative on June IA
last and that any one can keep opium
in his house as he would a decanter of
the finest bourbon.
In an oral decision rendered from the
bench yesterday afternoon. the Judge
sustained the demurrers in the cases CT
the Territory of Hawaii VS.. Sam Kun.
Lap Chu and Tau Chou, charged with
and convicted of having opium in pos
session. by the District Court. The meE
were each fined $50 and costs. The Judge
spoke briefly, although the decision is
ritory. He said:
THE demurrer in these cases will be
sustained. The Court finds that the law
prohibiting the possession of opium in
the Hawaiian Islands after the Organic
Act became effective, to wit, the 14th of
June, 1900, ceased to be operative such
law being in conflict with the Constitu-
ton of the United States and against the
Settled policy of the United States, as
evinced by it in placing a tariff duty up
on opium and permitting it to be brought
within the confines of the United States
upon the payment of such duty
Opposed to the view which | express
lis the case of the Territory of Washing
ton VS.. All Lin. decided in February,
1890 The case of Leisy VS.. Hardin was
decided by the Supreme Court of the
United States two months after the
Washington court rendered its decision.
So the opinion of the Supreme Court Of
the Territory of Washington may be
considered as having been. overruled by
the Supreme Court of the United States.
The Court has been engrossed with
engagements that it has not had the time
to prepare written opinion in this case
as it would like to have done.
| Il simply state my conclusion that the
demurrer should be sustained. the Court
finding the law to be unconstitutional
PLUMBERS SUIT.
t. Horito, by his attorney, e NJ.
Brooks, has filed an answer to the COM
iplaint Of Gehring & Butzke, making
statutory denial of all the allegations,
and further alleges that the plaintiff and
himself entered into a contract where
iby the plaintiff should perform services
land furnish material mentioned in plain
tff's complaint at the agreed sum of
1910, and that before the beginning of
lof this suit by plaintiff and after said
work had been finished, the defendant Of
fered the plaintiff the sum of $40 and the
plaintiff then and there refused the same.
THE defendant declares he has been rea-
Idy and willing at all times to pay this
amount, and now brings the same into
Icourt.
MACFARLANE-CATT SUIT DIS
MISSED.
A decree filed yesterday by the First
Circuit Judge in the bill for accounting
brought by John Fowler & Co., Ltd,
against Robert Cation ct al, orders that
complainants' bill do stand dismissed as
against the defendant Robert Cation,
with costs to be paid by the complain
ant to the said defendant This cause
! came on to be heard before the First
Judge at chambers on Friday, January is,
| on the demurrer of the defendant to the
bill of complaint. An oral decision was
tanning the demurrer on the grounds 81
lof uncertainty in the said bill and (2)
that the court has no jurisdiction over
the matters and things set forth in the
complaint.
Hatch & Slliman, attorneys for plain
tiff, filed their brief on demurrer of de-
PENDANTS. The motion of plaintiffs for
leave to amend their bill was denied and
the action summarily dismissed
FIRE INSURANCE CASES.
Return of summons mas been made in
the case of Sing Chan & Co. VS.. The AL
t lance Insurance Company. The plain
tiff, which is in reality the Oahu Lumber
& Building Company, seeks judgment
against the defendant for $3.50 on account
natown fire of last year Also returns
were made in the case of the same plain
tiff against The Insurance Company of
North America to recover $1,000, and
against The Svea Insurance Company for
200.
: Kwong Lee Yuen VS. Alliance Assur-
ance Company for $500 insurance; Sun
Lung The Insurance Company of
North America for 500; kwong Lee Yuen
VS.. Caledonian Insurance Company for
s2,250; Kwong Lee Yuen VS.. Alliance AS
surance Company for $3.50: Kwong Lee
Yuen VS.. Manchester Fire Assurance
Company for $3.50; Lee Tung ct al VS..
Insurance Company of North America
for $500.
, Demurrers have also been filed Ly
kwong Lee Yuen and Tong Chong Chan
have presented a motion to set a day
! for hearing on defendants demurrer
/ CIRCUIT COURT JURORS.
The trial jury for the February term
of the Circuit Court has been filed The
names of the jurors are as follows: Rob-
lert c. Lydecker Walter F. Dillingham;,
j. Oswald Lutted, Patrick H. Burnett.
Albert e. Harris, James Brown, George
w. Clark, Thomas H. Petrie, Charles
Ramsey, Peter A. Lucas, Walter w.
chamberlain, Thomas f. McTighe, Chas.
R. Collins, j. Harrie Mackenzie, Percy
Lishman, Simpson Decker, David T.
Bailey, Francis d. Creamy, Charles j.
F'alk. Albert Barnes, Quintus H Berrey
David l.. Conkling, William II. Schmidt
Samuel F Mott, Winfrid H. Bahbtt,
: Abraham ST. c. Piianaia, John NJ. Bright
= John W. Smithies. A. A Montana, Jchn
Fl. Wise, James Spencer. William j.
Smith, John Crowell, George Markham
BENJAMIN X. Kane and Christopher j
Holt
COURT NOTES
Defendants bin of costs in the tres
pass case of Nettie L. Scott VS. j. K
Nahale, amounting to 81, has been filed