Daily Republican., 1883-11-17
MuaacipOl CouPt.

his morning S6Ablnn OI MunlClp2l
Court was opened Ht y o'clock, with
JudRe Cummins on the bench. The
case Of William Whitaker, charged
withviolating city ordinance by erect.
ing frame house, was postponed un.
til next Saturday, but IT IL understood
that ~ he has complied with the law.
the Deputy Attorney General will enter
nolie pros and the case will be dis
missed, by his paying the costs.
The case of the State vs. John Dunn
for selling liquor on Sunday was taken
up for trial, with Deputy Attorney Gen
eral Turner for the State, and l. G.
Grubb and JohnK. Bradford, Esqs., Tor
the defence. Mr.. Grubb asked that the
Information be quashed, on the ground
that the Municipal Court has no juris-
diction to try cases of this kind, a. no
such power Is conferred under the Con-
stitution or laws OF this State. He con.
tended that In case Of this natur- a
defendant was entitled by the Constitu-
ton to trial by jury, and also that this
was not one of the offences enumerated
In the act establishing this Court.
He thought this Court could give this
case . preliminary hearing, and II the
evidence was sufficient, hold the defend
ant for trial at the Court of General
Sessions, but could not try and deter.
mine the case. He did not for one mo-
ment question the power of the Legisla'
ture to create this Court and give 1t the
power to try and determine cases emu
merated in the 18th section of the 9th
article of the Constitution, but he con-
tended that this WAS not one Of them.
The Court Of General Sessions granted
the licenses, and when the laws govern.
ing the sale of liquors was violated 1t
was the duty of that Court to try all
such cases. He cited \ number Of au-
thorities In support of his position, and
contended that the Constitution provid-
ed that no man can DO deprived of his
life, liberty or property, except by in.
dictment, and a trial before a jury OF
his peers, consequently no such cases
could be tried by mere information.
The Legislature has not given this
Court jurisdiction in any violation Of
the liquor laws, except to commit to the
higher Court. Mr.. Grubb made an able
argument in support of his position, and
concluded by saying that there was no
doubt that the Legislature intended all
such cases should be tried by a higher
Court, but even IL there was a doubt it
should be solved.
Ie was followed by Mr.. Turner, who
said that on account of the condition OF
the room he would not occupy the time
of the Court more than few minutes.
He claimed that this was Court Ofex
traordinary power, and was the on'y
Court in this State that could try and
determine cases without indictment or
trial by jury.
He said that in his opinion man
selling liquor on Sunday sold it without
license, as a person taking out Ii.
cense TO sell liquor, did so with the
understanding that he would sell &C.
cording to law, and that was all he was
licensed to do; all that he did beyond
that was done without license, but un.
less the Court could take the same view
of this matter, it must be granted that
this Court has no jurisdiction in this
case, or any other like it.
Mr.. Grubb made the concluding ar
gument and said in answer to the point
made by Mr. Turner, that If man had
a license, he could sell on Sunday, but
the law provided punishment for it.
a man has a right to work on Sunday,
but he can be punished for sodoing. He
produced copy Of a State license, and
raised the point that it was for one year
and did not specify any day during
that time on which liquor should OF
should not be soil. There was nc
proviso In the license law that forbid a
man selling on Sunday, but it was pro.
vihed that he should be punished if he
did so.
| The argument was not concluded un'
Ill II o'clock when the Court stated that
the decision would te reserved until
Thursday morning There were no
other cases before the Court, and it ad
journed until o'clock this evening.