Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1909-03-26
ais of licenses.

ais of licenses.
The article referred to contains
the statement that This makes II
obligatory upon the board to renew
licenses regardless of protest" This
is not So And an examination of
Section "a, already referred to, bears
out this statement. The local OPP
ton feature In respect to applica-
tions for renewals of licenses still
remains. Irrespective of the good or
bad conduct of the licensed business
q majority OF the registered voters
of the precinct in which the licensed
premises are situated, MS well as the
adjoining property holders, may pro-
test against the renewal of the H.
censc, and in such event the Board
has no discretion but to refuse the
renewal of the license and no appeal
could avail the applicant upon such
a decision OF the board
Our Association in attempting to
t''hN' 10 III
with what appears to he the popular
desire, that in the case of applica-
lions for licenses in the first in
stance the discretion of the board
be unhampcred and without limit.
This the amendments of Sections 4
and "a secure. The boards under
these amendments can arbitrarily or
otherwise restrict the number Of IL
censes as they deem best for the in
tcrests of the community. But the
Association is unqualihcdly against
any condition OF law which permits
a board to arbitrarily refuse a re-
newal of license where the liccn-
see has properly conducted his bust
ness and no protests are filed By eli
Their the registered voters of the pre-
cinct or the adjoining property hold
ors.
Therefore, the statement as con-
tained in paragraph 3 of the sum
mary Of objections that Boards of
License Commissioners are compelled
to grant new licenses" is incorrect
The statement as contained in the
article in respect TO the reduction or
increase in the fees for the respect
i've licenses is substantially correct
but II is a mistake to say The sec
ond paragraph Of Division 3 of Sec,
ton permits restaurants to sell
| liquor after the usual closing hours
and during election hours with OF
without meals by the payment OF
the extra s25O.00. The same para
graph permits hotels to sell liquor
after the usual closing hours and
on Sundays and election hours with
or without meals by the payment OF
the extra $4,000" In the first
place the amendment does not per
NIT the sale of Intoxicating liquors
during election hours. In the second
place II does not permit the sale OF
I intoxicating liquors without meals IN
restaurants on Sundays. And in tho
third place, the amendment accom-
| plisl'o Ht" Nht l'hNbl
that the present liquor law is silent
as to whether or not intoxicating
liquors can only he sold in hOtel'
and restaurants with meals. In fact
n proper Interpretation of the Law
results In the conclusion that tho
sale in either of those establishments
Is permitted without meals. And fur
ther, the Board of License Commits
sioners of the County of Oahu hav,
interpreted the Act to mean that In
toxicating liquors can be sold in Ell
ther restaurants or hotels at tables
without meals. II anything, the
amendment Is an Improvement Oh
the existing law, az II excludes alb
solutely the right of restaurants Il
sell intoxicating liquors without
meals on Sundays. and prohibits any
sales on election days.
These remarks are also applicable
to the reference made to the amend
ment of Section II.
The statement, therefore, as con,
tanned in paragraph 3 of the sum
mary that Privilege granted to res
taurants to sell liquor without meal,
after closing hours and during cleo
ton hours by the payment of the eN
ira $3.50" as well Ia the statement
contained In paragraph I, that PRIV
ilege granted to hotels to sell liz