Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1889-10-10


northeast corner Lancaster avenue and |
Franklin street. William L. Lyman,
Esq, stated that the application had
been withdrawn.
The next applicant was Michael j.
Sharkey for bottling establishment
southwest corner Harrison and Pleasant
street. Levi O. Bird, Esq, stated that
his client did not wish to keep saloon
His application was in order that he
might carry on the bottling business.
Mr.. sharkey had dropped his saloon
application last term because he thought
he would not need it in his new business
He does not propose to sell on the prem
.ses. he intends carrying on the trade
OF bottling malt liquors same as john p.
Donahoe. Half the families in town who
use malt liquors obtain them from bot
tiers. Counsel added that there is no
opposition.
uouft-"It's getting to be regular
business for applicants to come here and
get license and then sell it out.
Mr.. Bird and MIR. Vandegrift referred
to the good standing of MIR. sharkey.
The application OF George w. Griffith
was in the hands of Walter Bacon, Esq,
MIR. Prickett stated that the applicant
had continuously been refused license
and now the man applies again. The
court had heard the circumstances so
often that 1t was not worth while repeat.
ing them. Mr.. Bacon said that the Law
and Order Society had opposed his client
for general reasons and he was turned
down with O number of others. The ap-
plioant had lived in the southeastern sec
ton of the city for 10 years and had kept
q saloon there or years. There is but
one saloon there amid population OF
8 900 people. There existed no complaint
against him. The court demonstrated
with counsel stating that the application
had been refused over and over again.
Court would rather hear argument show
ing any benefit the saloon would be to
the neighborhood. Judge Oomegys con-
tinued, "It has been the general ruling
Of this court that persons turned down
will not be relicensed."
The next case was that Of William Il.
Brady, Eleventh and Church streets. Mr..
Priokett said the application was refused
the same time as Griffith's. He showed
o remembrance against the license. 1t
had been refused three times; the loca.
ton is near the church; there is a marked
improvement in the moral community
sicco the absence Of the saloon. The
residents have fought the application
continuously and successfully. The ap-
plicsnt was charged with trading in the
saloon business as saloon broker. Mr.
Brady said the remonstranoe was only q
general one, which did not affect him.
He denied being licensed broker, and
referred to the court records for proof.
He claimed the license was needed for the
locality, as over LOGO employees Of the
shops and factories pass there every day.
He asked that his good standing as q
citizen and the fact that there was moth
ing against him would be considered. MI.
Priokett thought the applicant had q
great deal of assurance to expect q license
over H. SCHUYLER.
Messrs. Hayes & Ward appeared for
the next applicant, Philip Ambold. Mr..
Priokett said 1t 10 q new application for q
place opposite the gates of the Pullman
Palace Oar Company, intended to catch
the employees. The application has been
most successfully fought by the resi-
dents. He showed a remonstrance signed
by 1856 people.
Mr.. Ward said his client has lease for
hotel at that location which has 81
rooms. Mr.. Prickett replied that the
rooms have no beds.
Then followed o discussion ss to
whether the hotel is yet built. Counsel
claimed 1t is completed. The contractor
was produced who stated that the build
ing ia not finished. The court stated
that no license can be granted to a houst
which is not built. The application wat
then withdrawn. That Of NichOla.
Janney was also withdrawn, the appli
cant having recently died.
In regard 10 the application of Thomas
L. Mousley, counsel for the Law ant
Order Society, stated that he had nothing
new to add to the old remembrance.
The application of Daniel DoughertJ
was withdrawn. This completed the list
with the exception OF the druggists appli
cations who Mr.. Pickett said are oil a
present licensed and keep druRstores
Walter Hayes, ESD, asked the court il
regard TO a point in contention as II
! whether freeholders signing license ap
J plicstions are required to be freeholder
OF the ward where the applicant doe
, business for whom they sign.
! Judge Oomegys said that while h
would give no exact decision upon til
point he was inclined to construe the laN
| as requiring the freeholder to be within
: the wsrd. And also he should be sub
stantial one not possessing merely
! trivial interest in the Locality.
Uourt then adjourned.
? LICENSES GRANTED.
; Michael j. Sharkey, southweit cornel
i Harrison and Pleasant streets; retailer
4 l!eanse.
George F. Robinson, No. log West Tent
a street; saloon license.
James Mulrooney southeast corner From
and Franklin streets; saloon license.
I, John McCatfrey, Nos. 3OO and 1902 Eas
Fourth street; saloon license.
= John A. North, No. ~ East Second stree
0 saloon license.
. Sarah E. Legg, 72i Market street; saloo
i license.
Also the following druggists:
= s. O. McKeever, Maryland avenue an
y Linden street.
{ T. B. Oartmel. northwest corner sixt
and Madison streets.
/, John J. Gallagher & Brother, No. l5C
Market street,
John ). Gallagher Il Brother. No. 200
y Il. W. Fem, Nc. ais West Eighth stree
It West Street Pharmacy, northeast cornt
a Second and West streets.
George T. Williams, northwest cornt
4. Tenth and Adams streets.
= Jacob s. Beetem, Seventh and Mark
streets.
Q Philip II. Wood, northwest corner Tent
IL and Market streets.
10 James NJ. Griffin, No. $50 West Fourt
a street.
). Hertel & Co., northeast corner Fourt
4 and Walnut streets.
y Middletown-WllllamR II. Pearson,
LICENSES REFUSED.
!, Margaret Bacon, No. 4 West Fourth stree
- Lawrence Ourran, No. Gl3 West Eigh
y street.
r George johnson. No. 404 West Fro