The Forest Republican. [volume] (Tionesta, Pa.) 1869-1952, 1892-05-25
COuRTs OPINION ON LICENSES.

The general interest in matter has
induced the publication Of the follow.
ing opinion of the Court on the license
question in Tionesta, as delivered by
Judge Noyes last week:
In Re, the Applications OF Brownell
and Agnew, for License to sell
Liquor.
OPINION OF THE COURT.
The applicants for license in the
Borough of Tionesta, have complied
with the law with respect to the form
of their petitions and bonds, and no
objection Is made 10 the fitness of
either applicant. Nor is It denied
that hotels are required in each Of the
houses for which license Is asked, for
the accommodation of the public and
the entertainment of strangers and
travellers,
Although many careful judges In
the State Of Pennsylvania have held
that under the act Of 1887, as well as
under previous laws, these facts alone
satisfy the requirement of the law and
entitle the applicants to license, we
are of the opinion that in addition to
these the necessity of q license to sell
liquor must be made to appear, dis
tinct from the necessity for hotel or
tavern. 1t Is obvious, however, that
the word necessary" In the license
law, does not mean indispensable, or
even necessary to the best interests or
well-being of the individuals compOs-
ing the "public." II used in such a
sense, ii could not be said that Ii
cense to sell liquor Is necessary any
where. But the phrase used In the
law is necessary for the dccODlnOdd-
ton of the public and the entertain.
ment of strangers and Travellers"
Places for the sale Of tobacco are nee.
essary for the accommodation Of the
public, where the public is accustom-
ed to use tobacco, although its use may
be Injurious and noXious. In the same
sense, a place for the sale of opium
may be considered TO be necessary, If
the consumption OF opium Is common
in the community, although its
use Is unquestionably injurious. But
because certain number of people
are accustomed to use intoxicating
liquors, it does not follow that there
should be license, nor because GER
tdlh hutlOVlt Vi q oiO
are opposed to Its use, that there
should not be. The Courts are re-
quired to determine the public necesS-
ity. 1t cannot be said that because a
majority of the people in a town are
opposed to license, that there Is no
public necessity. Just how large
portion of the people Is necessary to
comprise what is known as "the pub
lic," is very difficult matter to de.
termine.
For my own part / have no hes
itation in saying that l regard the
license law Of 1887, as intended to re-
strict and limit the traffic in intoxica.
ting liquors. And, therefore, where il
clearly appears that community
without license will not use intoxica-
ting liquors in any great quantity,
and will not supply itself by indirect
and illegal means, or where the senti-
ment of the people Is such that, in the
absence of licenses, it will enforce,
practically, prohibition of the traffic,
l am in favor OF refusing license In
such place.
AS to the situation In Tionesta, the
petitions, and large supplemental
petition i'm each case ,allege that there
is public necessity for license to self
liquor. Large remonstrances allege
that there is no such necessity. The
number of signers upon the remon-
strances is somewhat greater than the
number of signers to the petitions.
This,as the Supreme Court has repeat
edly instructed us, is not conclusive,
but is to be considered as evidence,
and the Court must determine The
fact by its own judgment and know
ledge OF the circumstances.
The evidence In open Court, in our
opinion, tends rather to show the
necessity than the want of it. The
only distinct fact brought out, bear
ing directly upon the question as we
view it, was the fact that there had
been established i'm the town surreptI.
tious means for supplying this de-
mand that, however appears to have
been but temporary eXpedient, and
for number of years no such club
room was shown to have existed, al
though the witness testified that he
knew that some other means of sup
plying the demand had existed. Thus
we are left, by the evidence before
the Court, largely In the dark, as to
the precise facts. Personally, do not
know how the matter is. should
be obliged to decide altogether upon
the papers, and the evidence given
in Court, if were sitting alone. But
my Associates are well acquainted
with the situation of Tionesta, and
they are of the opinion that the ne
cessity exists here as much as in other
places. 1t is matter Of reluctance to
me, and have no doubt to my as
sOciates, to enter upon what may be
deemed an experiment, and one
which may not turn out to be for the
best interests of the community; but
we are not here to decide such cases
upon moral grounds, or upon our per-
sonal views we are simply to deter.
mine the questions OF fact, taking in
to account the personal knowledge of
the judges, Of the situation.
II there Is in Tionesta, such a de.
mand for intoxicating liquors that,
without license, it will supply itself
by means which the law does not
recognize, il Is our clear duty to sup.
ply it by legal means and it is the
opinion Of my associates, who are
familiar with the town, that such is
the case. For that reason the bonds
in these cases are approved, and the
licenses granted. By the Court.
Z. II. MOVES, p. j.
GnIonAEH No.