Delaware gazette and state journal., 1884-02-28
AHOTH ER ILLIOIT DEALER

From the Den ON Market street Gear
water Held for Court for Selling
Liquor.
Sallie X. Kennard, 3 middle aged
oolored woman, WAS arrested by United
States Marshal MoMullen Ss urIay
on the charge Of selling liquor without
the payment Of the special government
tAx. She Was Immediately taken before
the United States Commissioner 3. Rod
mond Smith, ESQ.,, and through her
counsel, Harry Sharpley, Esq waived q
hearing and WAS held In $3.50 bail for her
appearance at the April term of district
court.
The prisoner is an occupant Of the
building No. 13 Market street In which
she has room rented FROM Patrick
Maloney who has shop aud carries on
shoemaking in the first story. The
house is tsnauted by about so low disso.
lutte negroes, four aud five occupying a
single apartment In which their cnokinp
is done and where they sleep. 1t has
long been regarded public nuisance
where liquor has been sold and gaming
in its lowest forms conducted. The
place Is almost constantly the scene OF
combat and disorder among the tenants.
The Kennard woman, 1t is oharR ed, sold
considerable liquor Of the worst possible
kind, In her apartment, and thereby tur
nished the chief element OF the disorder.
A day or two since William Davis, one Of
the inmates of the place, severely beat an
old man, vigorously pounded a dusky
maiden In the face and threatened to clear
out tie entire establishment, when the
muscular prisoner took him In hand, had
him arrested and nesss itated the
expenditure of about 90 to keep him out
of Jail. Ia retaliation he turned informer
and furnished information which led to
the woman's arrest.
A motley gang, numbering about 20
negro men and women, we're in atten-
dance at court Saturday as witnesses.
Such disgusting sight IS they presented
is difficult to conceive OF All were
ragged, and the clothing of some scarce
concealed their nskednsss. In the face
Of each the marks OF dissipation were
clearly defined.
The prisoner ia regarded as sort of
queen of her circle, and was rather
neatly arrayed. AS she viewed the
crowd of her patrons and associates who
had assembled to testify againBt her, tears
came to her eyes, and she declared that
they wers most ungrateful as she had
been mother to them all, and when the
police were after some OF them had saved
them from arrest. She WAS dispos. d to
be communicative and stated that the
house WAS honeycombed with policy
shops, gambling dens, sweat rooms and
other kinds Of games. She admitted that
the place was not lacking a single ess-n-
tiRl to constitute public nuisance.
Judge Cummins presided at the munich
pal court Tuesday morning. and heard the
argument OF City Solicitor Turner in the
case OF the city vs. country butchers. In
opening his argument, Mr.. Turner said
the interest involved in this case is great
not only to the producers but to the pur-
ohasers. The city charter provided that
Council shall have the power to erect
market houses and regulate the mar
kets. Madison street was made general
market for the sale OF meat, and King
street special market for the
sale of meat. What is
the police power To correctly define
that power ia almost an impossibilty.
One of the powers, however, is to estab.
lish and control markets. The SINNERS
are the ones to complain. They are the
people who were driven from the streets.
They had taxes to pay. II always had
been his opinion that the proper thiog
WAS free market or no market. The
SINNERS were legislated completely out
of the market. The farmers were given
privileges the residsnts could not enjoy.
There was very grave doubt in his mi I'D
whether the City Council had the right
to say there should be 8 street market,
but the counsel for the defense wonld not
touch that question, as it would severely
cut his throat. The ordinance was no,
passed in the interest of the butchers,
because they were more than willing Ia
go themselves on the street and sell. Mr..
Turner quoted many authorities, and
closed his argument at IL O'Clock.
Mr.. Bird followed in a few brief re.
marks, and concluded by saying the
main question ia has the Legislature the
power after the passage OF the Pourteenth
amendment to say one person shall dt
one thing and another citizen shal
not have the same privilege to do tha
thing.
The court said that 1t would give ,
decision inside of week.