The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-10-28
VIEW EXCISE DISPUTE.
Commissioners. Morton aud Patterson Ar
raigned before Justice Morgan.


"Your nsmer was the conundr,im that
Justice Morgan propounded at quarter TO four
O'Clock yesterday afternoon In the Tombs Police
Court to one OF the two Excise Commissioners
that stood before him. Norton" was the
answer. You received an application OF
Frederick Hollender for n license to sell liquor,
for which be paid you t1OO1" "whsts the
offence 2" Commissioner Morton Inquired,
granting the license or receiving the money!
Both" said Justice Morgan. THE case IL
clearly civil suit" continued Morton. lana
would not have been brought Ia this court but
fot one reason. Among the liquor dealers there
r. a class, lawiess In spirit II not In deed who In
revenge for clOeinR their establishments on Sun
days--the net OF the Police Commissioners and
not VI the Board " Excise-purpose to intifni-
date the Excise Commissioners by this mode OF
persecution.
Here Mr.. VIM. II. Mundy. counsel for the com.
said that he wished merely to test the question.
why didn't YOU get II tested by the OWL
I" How could II" Mundy asked.
:" am not bound to give you legal instruc.
Justice Morgan he said II don't propose to
give bail In this case, nor will avail nlvsef OF
the Habess Corpus act am willing to make n
MARTYR of myself In the execution OF my sworn
dIty."
Commissioner Patterson next took M the
| cudgcl In behalf OF himself and his colleague,
a IN onographer.
Tbe presence Of the Cou .nissioners in the
Ton bs Police Court was due To warrant from
Justice Morgan on complaint Of Frederick w.
Hoander. keeper Of the saloon under the stddfs
Z,ftung once. In his afndavit the deponent act
forth that he did not Keep either inn or tavern
or hotel that the defend nts, Geo. W. Morton,
Owen Murphy, and Jacob VI. Patterson, had
warned him that II he sold liquor without
license they should prosecute him. and that la
consequence Of this warning ho had paid them
tl0O for license. all Of which was contrary to
certain statutes OF the State prohibiting the
granting Of licenses To sell liquor to be drunk
ON the premises to persons not keeping either
inu or tavern or hotel.
The complaint ~ bassd on the averment that
statute Of 1857 ordains that no license sh ~ he
granted to sell liquor to be drank on the prem
hotels nor to storekeeper. to sell In less guam
| titles than nve gallons. A It ,tute OF 1909 en-
larges this strict Law by making ale and beer an
exception to the rule. The statutes oil 1870 aud
1873 On tue same subject give the Board VI Ex
else power to grant licenses on tho applica nts
! but the statute OF 1873 says nothing about the
| liquor being drank on the premises. Here Is
| where the complainant takes his stand. He
| holds that these statutes oonfer the power to
grant licenses to sell liquor only, and that there
| being nothing to the contrary. the statute OF
the premises except In the cases OF the owners
| OF Inns. taverns. and hotels. Ia still In force.
TIE Excise Comm ssOners OF course hold that
the statutes Of 1870 aud 1873 nulfy that OF 1881.
AFTER due delibeTation yesterday Justice DIOR
nau decided that N be were To proceed with the
q - II might seem to he tried for political
effect, and he accordingly postponed further
operations until Nov. 10
he ENClse Commissioners were accordingly
released ON thei; parole.