New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-05-24

]
penalty. Here, in 1855 they had passed fs'N
whose prohibition wen. into Effect The first 81 NAY
and the penalty the fourth II July. and they rtrs
irving TO apply tie penalty % repealed statute D.
/ 1913 the Colonial Legislature. IN dehancs OF the
| MAYORS pTerorat.ve farmed os, The right t,lcense
and here lie Honor would perceive the alscT o. the
learned Judges who had considered This 20 h. nui-
same since they would hardly ad-srise and All by
auction TIE night TO commit nuisarra. Prom i'5D
10 17s- The Mayor continued 90 lcctT~. L. rs,
Commissioner 70 grant licenses was appointed oy ne
Legisla'up-.he first legislative interference uniT
our Charter. AMI that was sustained because ], ha'
held that the Common Council had permit 50 such m
reference either b. wsver or petition. Il% Name
Law authorized licenses. Now If q man had license
urder II he might -ell be pleased. aud tsy Ger
toinly would not 20 back to another law Tor penalty
for violating this. They hsd been Obliged o. force
penalty by Implication, and now they wouid nave 20
force absurtity by construction. Inc hrst ac' ~ IL
cense under the common law was passed ne az Pre-
hcuded 20 prevent breaches Of the peace Of securing
men Of character for keepers Of ale-hOuses. NT.
Tonlnson then proceeded to discuss some OF me IN
consisencies Of the PrOhibliory Law. II had been
decided he said that mere reference 10 an az - .ne
penalty Of former act did not entail that penalty.
And this Maine Law, which swept away al IaNS on
the subject. must a tortiorI sweep away all PEN
aliies
Tie Court then took recess Of hall an hour
In passing out and along the street toward the Sixth
Av some thirty OF the more jealous " defenders OF
.tbeir rights made rush upon the Rev. Mr.. Black
knocked off his hat struck him blow, causing cash
on the side Of the head nearly inch long, and were
following him up when Mr.. Tomn-on interviewed, and
~, some rather energetic physical demonstrations pre-
vailed upou them to desist He appealed 3 them not
., min their cause and 10 strike him IL anybody
The Police came up with their habitua punctuaiiy
sncr i, was all over, but nobody knew who had made
the rush or who struck the blow.
All O'Clock Mr. H. SKINS, the Corporation Attorney
commenced bis argument. lie said that he APP
nroaohed the case with considerable dhdenco nj be-
nf, compelled 10 differ from the opinions OF the Coun
sel Of the Corporation the District Attorney, and the
learned counsel in this He would not enlarge
upon the abstract duties Of society, or say much OF
organized force as displayed by the Liquor Deal
ers Association in their resolves, or IN their re-
cent demonstration down stairs. He could not
agree with the learned counsel in consider
ing the sale Of liquor to be free under the
common law. In the City Of Ncw-York particularly,
and in the State OF NeT-iOrk certainly, the sale Of
liquor never ha. been free. BY the charter OF 1850
tho sale Of iguOr prohibited and penalties were ny
that charter designed to be imposed and were sub'e-
oueutlv imposed. Power was given the Corporation
10 enact such ordinances III relation to the sale 81
Eoror a. mrht be necessary for the wellgoycrnance
~ re Civ SO in 1856 II necessary 20 get
license 10 sell liquor in this City and the traihc was
not free. BY act passed by the Legislature Oh thht
pressly given to the Corporation BY an act passed.
in 1888 entitled act for the SUPPRESSION OF PanPer-
i'm and Crime almost III the same terms rs the act OF
1855 general power given the Corporation 70 pass
sucb ordinances as they might see nj. In the charter
at 173O the penaliy for selling without license was
fixed at G5 In TIE City Of New-fork there had al
WAYS been more prohibition, or regulation win lhcf
dental prohibition, than IN any other part or me Stie
There were three kinds OF license to sell 10 be
drunk on the premises another to sell in quantities less
than five gallons not 10 be drunk the premises, and
I rtrI 20 Hnmn
throughout the State no provision had been made with
regard TO the sale of liquor in quantities over hye
gallons but in the City there was law IN relation 20
h II The statute of ls0l had been rg.diy enforced
/ in the city ii would have prevented very
much of the excitement which had been raised against
/ those who were engaged in the liquor traffic That
statute provided that licenses TO eel to be drunk on
the premises should be granted only 10 taverns ana
thos9 who provided board and lodging for travellers.
The act of 1894 made selling without license MS
domoanor and added criminal to the cyl penalty OF
S25. Then in ls2j came the law promDung the SAFE
IN quantities Of five gallons without license, TN
/ der penalty Of S2J fine provided that nothing con
tanned IN II should appy 80 any impOltsr ~ dls,ei'
Tho law Of 1927 provided that the penalties should 90
20 the support of the poor and II was under tha ia"
thai he was prosecuting that defendant for so Tor me
poor He had also counted in his complaint the ponce
ordinance passed by the Corporation last March lie
now came to the act OF 1852 which had e1Ssea SOM
thing ike a dozen published opinions, a. diHeIeh, a.
their retainors had induced them to be- Secuoh mr.,
| abolished the lscnse system. but he cOhiehueH ina
nat all not extend 10 the penalties as they existed be
e.
/ fore April 9th ANY person might oDiah iiocusv ~
I ou fIr certain purposes under that act 10y gong
through the prescribed iomalte-. IL was more hot-
raj than the old license system; 10 lee was ueihanue'
| for the license We cOnteuded that the section r.
pcaing the old system Of granting hcenres look ene-1
when The act became law. This was TO give men
who were interested IN the traihc an opportunity on
the frst of MAY 10 find other business lie supio'eu
that no part of the net was to be considered ID orce
e.ccrt the second section which took effect the
first of Nav and the enty-htth when went mo
effect on the passage of the act ali the otheI paris,
including the repeating Parts were 10 iake eiect On
the Attn of uv IL far TO take INTO conslucf"tioh
Tho intent of the Legislature. Could u be possible
fiat thew intended II at there should be free trade IA
rum as the Recorder and District Attoriel hau ue
cidedl If that had been their intention, woud u moi
/ have been more appropriate 10 have entitled II an
/ Act to Ceuse Intenperance, Paupcrsm and Crime
until the Fourth of July, and aieTward 10 prevent H.
The old penalty not inconsistent win lhv H." 'aH'
! and consequently was not REPEALED Inc common
law had nothing 10 do with The case IL cav piny IA
1fsG 10 written law. He could not but cal a'eniion
10 the studied silence of the Corporation Counch IN
his published opinion as TO the night to sen between
the first of May aud the Fourth OF Juls' lie larry
! lodged the question, referring The querloh 70 me
/ Criminal Courts He did not indorsc tie DISTRICT
/ Attorneys opinion, but he put tie question and
then left every one acquainted with the English ian
gnage 10 infer that he differed from the District
/ Attorney Mr.. Haskins then proceedel TO nohce
come parts in the argument OF MI lohlisoN' ne was
very sad he said that reference had been mEde 20 po-
/ ltieai bia-es Ii enabled him 10 say hat very many
questions had been decided according to polilcal bias
In his Judgment the Canal Law was SO cecIl',i' ana
ne exrs.ted that the body OF the law the search anu
| s,izure clauses would b. declared unconstitutional
! oron political grounds by the Court Of Appeals.
Twelve opinions had been publIshed-.N III ia'of OF
the law and SIX against 1t. Against II were 'h"-e Oh
| Hill Dillon Beardsley Girard, Han ana smith
Carron. Wells and Warng. II was worthy OF remark
that each one of these gentlemen rendered hls opinion