Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1889-07-04
THAT LICENSE COURT.
Editorial Opinions efths PhiIadeIphia PaDsrs
On the Manifesto 1ssued By the Judges

Editorial Opinions efths PhiIadelphia PaDeru
On the Manifesto 1ssued By the Judges
A General Review Of the Case.
The Licens eCourt met yesterday and made an
order directing that wholesale licenses shall
issue to all brewers and bottlers who have made
applications, and have not Withdrawn them, the
Clerk of the Court to pass upon the suficiency
of the securities offered. This Ii the result of
the decision Of the Supreme Court In the Pros
pect Brewery case, and will doubtless be re-
graded as rather extraordinary action. The
License Court accompanies its order, however,
with statement in which IL argues that 1t has
nothing else to do under the ruling of the high
or court, and 1t shows considerable feeling. pro-
yoked by the tone and temper displayed all the
way through the Supreme Court deliverance,
which has already been pretty freely criticised.
The License Court accepts the super ior authori
ing convinced that it is right 1t was probably
never intended BY the Supreme Courtin taking
the position 1t did that licenses should be given
to people not Of good moral character, conyicts
and common drunkards who for years have led
the most abandoned lives. Yet this is the in
depreciation put upon that decision which was
substantially that licenses should be granted
where no remousrrances as to the moral
character of tae applicants had been filed.
We believe the License Court has taken an
unnecessarily extreme view OF the matter. and
the suspicion will be aroused that it has been
the language used by the Supreme Court 1t
has been allthe way through most remarkable
proceeding. the temper of the higher court
having apparently been aroused by the almost
despotic exercise of authority by the License
Court. The result will not be to render liquor
selling more free, as 1t in no way affects the re-
about the wholesalers The order made by the
License Court yesterday, however, must have q
tendency to make the act concerning wholesale
licenses odious. 1t will compel material
clanOag n la vUh IsaO
can get at 1t. If that provision of the law which
enables objections to be heard by evidence,
petition, remonstrance or counsel means that
acter cannot be refused wholesale license
except on a written remonstrance filed, then it
will have to be made palmer. It seems pretty
plain now, but there is certainly something
wrong with 1.-THE Inquirer.
Very Unusual Cosrse.
The Judges of the License Court have taken
the very unusual course of entering what may
be called a protest against the recent decision
probation OF the Wholesale liquor act. No one
can doubt that these Judges conscientiously
endeavored to do right, and that where they
erred it was through an honest desire to serve
the public welfare. The sense of this and the
feeling that they have been undeservedly re-
buked. must be the justification for this extra
ordinary proceeding. But II the License
Judges felt compelled by their self-respect to
defend their course, that same self-respect
should have forbidden the petulant order to
their clerk to issue wholesale licenses to every
body who has applied, without regard TO
Character or habits. To say that the decision
Of the Supreme Court requires this is to put
upon it a forced construction that Is neither
logical nor sensible, and that presents the
Judges In the attitude OF children who won't
play any more"
They are required by the letter of the statute
and by its authorized Interpretation to issue
licenses to citizens of the United States Of
temperate habits and good moral character,
and to none others. Their duty to inquire into
The confusion that has arisen between two dis
tinct acts is mainly due to their own practice.
As long as this construction was not overruled
it was accepted without question; but now that
the law has been clearly defined any further
disputation is most unbecoming. If the License
Judges have hitherto administered the law, as
they understood it, with conscientious care
and in an endeavor to do right and justice. it is
promote respect neither for the law nor for
themselves when they petulantly refuse 70 per-
form their functions because they think they
have been badly treated.-The Times.
A Sober and Admirable Defense.
The reply of the License Court Judges to the
structures of the Supreme Court on their inter-
probation and manner of enforcing the whole
sale license law is a sober and admirable de-
fense of their action and an able exposition of
the law. They do not admit that they read the
provisions of the retail act into the wholesale
act as the Supreme Court assumes, but base
their action on the much more tenable ground
that the general practice throughout the State
under the Wholesale law as it stood prior to
1887, practice sanctioned by many decisions
of the Supreme Court, gave them discretion
in granting wholesale licenses having regard to
the moral fitness of the applicant as well as
his citizenship and habits of temperance.
The existing wholesale laws in force in 1887
certainly required the Court to take cogni-
zance of those three things and in withholding
licens es because they deemed the applicants
morally unfit TO receive them, their action was
not without authority of law. even though the
Supreme Court disapproves and overrules their
conclusions-7he Press.
Good Fighters to be Admired.
The Judges of the License Court are quite
right in characterizing their published COM
ment upon the decision of the Supreme Court
in the Prospect Brewery case as an unusual
course. But none the less will their fellow
townsmen be pleased az their action. for the
American citizen loves good fighter, and finds
no fault with the small boy who resents some
times deserved chastisement by kicking and
biting his chastizer. Perhaps the proper Sc
quence to the ruling OF the Supreme Court was
should be granted, though 1t looks a little bit
previous" The evils Of unsatisfactory laws
can be, and must be, corrected by legislative
action, and not by the extra-iIdicial discretion
through whose hands the applications for
liquor licenses must pass hasSpparentIy been
that, excited by praise which they well deserved
for their integrity and courage, they fzncied
they were themselves the Isw instead of its
ministers.
Just now they are very angry at their elders
in years and Judgment, and think it their duty
to show the people just what iniquities will be
possible under the decision Of the Supreme
Court. Perhaps under the sting OF phrases
they don't like they may realize that some of
the harsh criticism they have put on persons
with less chance than themselves to hit back
has also hurt The service of the four Judges
the License Court has been of
great beneht to the city. That Is fact which
cannot be too much paraded. 1t is, however.
never to be accepted as safe doctrine that The
law itself may be ignored for even the public
benefit. 1t was as question OF law that the
North american took issue with the zeal OF
these Judges, and upon question OF law It Is
scarcely probable that outside OF their own
number anyone will be found except In the
of friendship. to hold the iudg-
ment of the Supreme Court of the State i'm
paired by the dissenting views OF these juniors.