The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1905-01-05
AGAINST
THE CLUB
Judge Whitney Decides
The Celebrated
Case.

sion yesterday morning in the cele-
brated Club case. He found the club
guilty as charged of selling liquor
without license. The case was tmme-
diateIy appealed and Will go before
the Supreme Court as the test liquor
case Judge whitney's decision. in full,
is as follows:
The defendant is charged with hav-
Ing. at Honolulu. Island of Oahu, on
the 18th day of December, 1894, vio-
lated the provisions of Section 444. of
the Penal Laws of the Territory of
Hawaii. 1897 oy selling spirituous
liquors without license. The follow
ing admissions are made by The defend
ant. which admissions form the agreed
statement of facts on which the briefs
submitted by both parties are predi-
Gated:
The contention of the defendant is
that bona fde club. organized for le-
gitimate purposes, can dispense liquors
TO its members without procuring any
license under the laws relating to the
sale of liquors, as expressed in chap
| ter Al of the Penal Laws OF 1897. To
sustain this contention defendant first
calls this courts attention 10 long
and weighty list of names. high in Office
and large in power in this Territory,
who have not until now moved TO bring
the defendant to the bar of justice.
| thereby warning this court that It were
bare presumption to hold against the
defendant in the face of such an ar
ray. Citing then the cases. which to
the mind of counsel for defendant sus-
| tain the contention that bona fi1e
club may freely dispense liquors 10 its
mernbel without a license, defendant |
closes with another solemn warning to I
deciding against the defendant, violate |
his oath Of office.
Referring to defendants first con-
tentton it is sufficient for this court to /
say that the only time that II appears
that this matter was brought 70 the at-I
tention of the Attorney Generals De-
partment, Mr. z. p. Dole. the then At
torney General, used the following 1an-
guage: Without expressing an opin- 4
ion that this is legal or Illegal I think
you are justified IN warning the Eilzs
that the Attorney Generals Depart
ment must take the position that sales
for profit and not at cost, and as a
mere iRci1ent Of the festivities of the
lodge. cannot be recognized MS lawful.
las to the cases, a lengthy citation
thereof by this court would be as use-
isss as 1t would be Inappropriate Most
Of those cited by defendant as sus-
tanning his contention are founded on
the early case OF Graft VS. Evans.
Exch. % Lax EEseg. 80. This case.
though carefully considered ana ex-
eeedingIy valuable would not, We be- /
lieve from d earetdl reading, have been
decided as il vras ander our statute,
which is much broader and nr~se in
elusive than the English License Act
of that date That case was one of an
contemporaries club. The case, too. has
been under consideration in many of
the highest State tribunals and been
there expressly and enphaticaIly criti-
cised. many courts refusing to follow !
it, holding the reasoning deficient and
the case TOO restricted to apply gen
orally.
Many of the cases go off on points I
i.
for instance. Commonwealth VS. Ewig. $
l45 Mass. 121. and many others of the
same class, where the club was merely (
a device 10 cheat the Government OUT
Of the prescribed license zee So, also. :
State VS. Easton, 10 Nd 81. 10 L. R. A
81, and numerous Others, where the q
charge was one of violating local OPP I
ton laws In still other cases the pros 7
acution was under laws specifically in |
sluding clubs So might instances be Z
multiplied where other elements than q
hose appearing here have been pres q
ant These decisions have somewhat
'louded what should be simple case {
and have made il appear that there &
las been no uniformity and little rea-
son IN the decisions in club cases
SUIT certain elementary rules must lie g
t the foundation of all decisions We
'eiieve that the rule of the case at n
'ar dictated by reason and established u
y authorities, is this; that
First, where the liquor is owned by.
n individual or a partnership. be the
erson or persons natural or corporate
nj
Second. where that liquor is sold to 4
mother, be he a member of a. club or
plain citizen. that there is a sale of
le liquor as contemplated by al the
-atutes regulating the sale OF liquors.
hen this sale is made without a IL
anse- then the statute has been vio- Y
ted III
such being the courts opinion Of
le law. but Two points remain to this
'urt for decision. namely, "a to whom
d the liquor belong2 and ~ was there
sale2 -
As to the first of these. the LIQUOR I
as either The property Of the coTpora- | ]
on or il was the joint property OF All /
ie members Of the association. IN ! !
e matter Of ownership there can be
difference between the Pacific CTuo :
I'd any other corporation. The stock
'iders Own no part Of the property