Sunbury American. [volume] (Sunbury, Pa.) 1848-1879, 1858-05-29
SNliste!laneous.
SINGULAR D,FFERENcEs

We alluded, few days ago, to the con.
struc,ion placed upon the uew liouor law by
Judge GAtpRAIru, OF the Erie district as dI.
rectly ct variance with that given bv Judge
PEARSON, OF our own Court. E!rce then %o
have seen another construction given 10 il,
conflicting, still more, with the views Of Judge
PEARSON, The EaSton Daily Times, Of the
18th inst, notices Il new kiuk ~ the amended
liquor law, which was 50 amended by the
Senate as 10 allow al Inquiry into the neces
sity Of the license applied for, but which was,
10y the resoluteueSs of the House, lost, aud
the or ginal bill, as it passed the llousc, be.
came the law Of the land The Times says; ;
"On Friday last u number Of applicants
came up and were confidently pressed, on the
ground that their necessity for the accommo-
datiou Of the public was not TO be considered
that the having complied with the forms Of
tue law, they were entitled to their licenses
as matter Of course, and that the Court
could not refuse them. Gov. Reedtr, how.
ever, who was adversely employed took the
ground that the Legislature wcro entirely
mistaken us to the meaning and effect of lhu
law they had pas3ed-that il had no such on
Grafton as was geueraly ascribed to it, aud
that, in fact, the Court Hes bound to inquire
as under the old law, whether the tavern pro.
posed was necessary for the accommodation Of
the public, and il, / III ir opinion, il was not
necessary, they must reject the application.
The matter was argued on Friday evening,
and Saturday morning, and Gov. Reeder So
clearly an Concusiycly established lis posi-.
ton, that there can be no dOuLt apo L the sub.
jret. Nearly, if not quite all the members Of
the bar, MS We leurn, CONCUR iG tho opinion
that the argument cannot be answered, and
all the citizens We have heard speak On the
snhipct ar. Of the same Opuiun
Singularly enough, the counsellor for the
applicants was Mr. Gocpp. who, as Chairman
of the Judiciary Committee IL th. House, haa
the reputation OF having prepared the hill
He is certainly an able lawyer and clear Lead.
ed logical maa, aud yet We are tUl1, he was
unable to meet the position taken by Gov.
Recier, aud argued th4 question in such
manner Gs TO convey the impression that he
was convinced against hs WI.
We are not learned in the Law, bnt We un-
derstand that tho position is based on the To-
gal operations Off proyiSo in the sixth section
of the new Law, and also upon the argument
that by the repeal Of rrpealing law the third
section Of the act Of 1884 was Unexpectedly
revived. it is generally considered here .
capitol joke upon the Legislature.
If the law is so ambiguous in its language
as to justify such widely different conStruc-
| lions IL Is higedul k4NlS bHiN ~ shuHld VIC ~
| pealed, or that the proper judicial tribunal
should give authority on one construction or
the other. For ourselves, we calnot see how
any man can place amy other constructions
upon the Law than those given by j d5e
Pearson. They are plain, common sense
views, and such as the language OF the law
alone will justify, however much the practical
workings Of t,nnder such interpretation, may
! tend 10 bring it into disrepute.