Evening journal., 1889-10-09
WANT TO SELL LIQUOR.
EVIDENCE FOR AND AGAINST THE
GRANTING OF LICENSES.
The Law and Order Society Does Not
Make Vigorous Flight. But No New
Applicants or Old Places WIN Get a
LicenAe.


Make a Vigorous Fight. But No New
Applicants or Old Places WIN Get n
License.
At the opening Of court yesterday
afternoon the consideration Of spplica-
tions for licenses was begun. There
we're no objections or remoastrances
against the following. All are old places
reapplying: Sarah E. Legg, No. 724
Market street; James Mulrooney, corner
Of Front and Franklin streets; John
McCatfrey, Nos. 300 and 302 East Fourth
street, and John A. North, No. 10 East
Second street; William r Pearson, Mid
dletown' George F. Robinson, No. 1O6
West Front street.
w. S. Prickett. Esq, counsel for the
Law and Order Society, simply put in the
remonstrances and objections previously
urged against Margaret Bacon, No 4
East Fourth street and Lawrence Curran,
No. GLIB West Eighth street, both of whom
had been previously refused.
The same petitions were presented
against George Johnson. No. 40i West
Front street S. A. McAllister, Esq,
represented Johnson. and Charles b.
Lore, ESQ, made statement 70 the
court recommending the applicant
The applications Of Bernard Carr, No.
sos Church street, and Joseph Hendel,
No. 3l5 East Seventh street, were with
drawn
Levi G. Bird represented Johanna
hoberlie, No. 1913 East Eleventh street.
This was new applicant for an old
place, Bernard Farren being the last
applicant. MIR Bird stated that the
woman was Of exemplary character
and fully deserved a license. Rev.
R. Irving Watkins, pastor of Kingswood
NJ. E. Chapel. testified against the grant
ing Of the license, maintaining that there
was no more necessity for saloon at
that point, than there was when Bernard
Farren was repeatedly turned down
GOOD order had been improved by there
being no saloon. Mr. Bird found his
match when he started to cross examine
the witness.
After hearing the evidence in this case
court adjourned.
Chief Justice Comegys stated to
! members of the bar after adjournment,
that in minor cases where large num-
Der of witnesses were summoned, the
court must be furnished with list of
the same. Where there is an excessive
number the court desired to know what
was to be proved by them.
Councilman shArlIey's Application.
The first application taken up this
morning WAS that of Councilman
Michael j. Shsrkey, who is making Q
new application for bottler's license at
the southwest corner Of Harrison and
! Pleasant streets. Levi c. Bird, ESQ
represented Mr.. Sharkey. There were
] Al -
Society does not demonstrate against
licenses to bottle malt liquors Tn,
chief justices remarks, however CAV,
the impression that the license would b,
refused.
old Places Turn mp Again.
George w. Griffith, Eleventh ant
Thatcher streets. was represented b,
Walter Bacon, Esq, who put in a gooC
word for him, claiming that his salooi
had been an orderly, reputable place 70
years, and when objections were mad
was not prepared to reply to them, be
cause they were unexpected. MI
Bacon expatiated on the needs OF the SO
loon by the increasing population Of tina
section Of the city. Mr.. Prickett mad
no particular objection beyond stain
that the place had been refused a hsens
for year.
The place for which William H. Brad
applied, at the southwest corner Of EleS
enth and Church streets, had been turne
down number of times when AZ
, piled for by other men. Ml
Prickett stated these facts an
noted the improved morality Of the CON
munity since the license had been re
fused Brady has place at Front an
Jefferson streets aud later at anothe
place and had disposed OF them. MI
Prickett implied that Mr.. Brady was
speculator. Mr.. Brady had no counst
and made a statement in his own behalf
which from its tenor, perhaps, did n
good.
The House Was Not Completed.
Philip Ambold was a new applicant 70
! a new place. Mr.. PTickett opposed th
place on general grounds, claiming tha
j there was no necessity for the saloon
and that after having cleared the con
munity Of saloons by hard fght the pee
pie desired to keep them away A remor
strance signed by 1856 persons was present
cd. Messrs II. IL. Ward Esq and Waite
II. Hayes, Esq. represented the applicant
s Mr. Ward stated that the house was j
! course OF erection and nearly completed
/ ~ tyAtdiAFN tnlAt Two llOIa. MI. I 7
I kett made it point that there were n
! beds in the house as required by law an
o could not be until it was finished III
s court would not consider the case unles
! the house was completed. the applicaI
b living in it, ana every requirement Of tI
law complied with; so the apphcatio
: was withdrawn.
The next case was that Of Thomas
Z | Mousley. northeast corner Of Elliott av,
F. nue. and Market street. This place hS
been refused number of times and M
: Priekett made no new objections. Nj
\ Mousley had no counsel.
There were no objections TO the appl
K cations Of the druggists According
, the new law, druggists must not on
:, have license, but are required to sell (
3 physician's prescription, and orde
u must be pasted in a book for public il
n spection. All the druggists ia the Gil
\ have sold on prescription since the ne
law went into effect on July 1.
y After the licenses had been disposed
+ court was adjourned in course
, The chief justice was asked to EXPIRE
y an opinion on a section Of the new licen
p law which provided that twelve of &
n twenty four signers to the certificate q
4 companying an application shou
be substantial freeholders. His Hon
n said there was no doubt but til
e. the freebolders should reside In the SAT
! ward that the application was made fro
D and it was his impression that their FRI
hold should be in the same ward. Th
would also have to be substantial fl