Los Angeles herald., 1892-03-02

privilege OF going out and getting addi-
tional names to the protest.
President Last of the Liquor Dealers
association-We could also go out and
get additional Withdrawals.
Chairman Perry-I think a man has a
right to withdraw his name from a pc
tition which he may have signed under
Misrepresentation.
Assistant District Attorney Marble
| If the protestants unanimously with
draw the protest would fall, so also will
it be governed by the result of the with
drswals now made.
Supervisor Cook moved they be al
lowed to withdraw their names from the
protest and it was carried, and a motion
that license be granted w. r. Dodson
was carried.
The application of w. H. Hall OF Ell
Monte was continued until today, Mr..
Rush asking until Wednesday to allow
petitioners to withdraw from the pro-
test. The application of G. B. Poggi of
Ell Monte being defective was with
| drawn. The next cases were those OF
Michael Fahey and Timothy Lyon of Ell
Monte, which were continued until
Wednesday morning. Against the ap.
| plication of Frank Jascen of Lordsburg,
( there was protest signed by ITO, two
| thirds required to kill the license being
elghty-elght.- There was counter pc
tition signed by thirty-five persons who
had appended their names to the pro-
test, so the case went over until We'd
nesday.
w. H. Bowen of Compton was next
on the list; eighty-eight protests were
required and ninety.eight signers Sc
cured. Mr.. Gage presented Withdrawals
| from eleven signers. and affidavit set
ting forth that four of the signers were
not residents of the precinct. The
license was granted.
Joseph Santongue, Compton: There
were eighty-eight protests necessary
and lightweight signed; Mr.. Gage pre-
sented Withdrawals from the protest
from seven signers. License granted.
James Cosgrove, Compton: One
hundred and three signers necessary
and 112 signed. 1t was laid over until
Wednesday. A double-barreled protest
was filed against R.. Blondean and M.
Labaig & Co. of Cahuenga. and was
ruled out as not proper.
Judge Anderson-I protest against
that ruling the petitioners have right
to sign against more than one applica-
blOil Va PCblGlOAs We OuShU W ioNC q
right to discuss this matter.
Chairman Perry-The board has
ruled that such applications are i'm
proper and that settles it. We propose
to consider all applications singly.
n. G, Burch-I move that the board
reconsider its action.
The chair-You have no right to
make motions here.
N. G. Rush-Isn't this court?
The chair-No, sir, this is the board
of supervisors.
The matter was laid over until to-
morrow also the applications of Phillip
Flynn, VIM. Shannon, NJ. Carrizosa, G.
Winter, H. Pierroni, against whom
le-barreled protest had been filed,
were passed until Wednesday.
Supervisor Davis moved that the
board have arguments as to whether
double-b -barreled petitions should be con-
sidered, which was adopted.
Judge Anderson-There certainly can
be no objection to the people of ex-
pressing their wishes in one paper in
stead of three. They convey identically
to the board their objections in such
manner. You did not prescribe that
separate protests should be made before
you opened up this question. The peo-
pie have expressed their wishes in
plain manner.
Mr.. Gage-Judge Anderson says the
signers have had fair chance. l want
to see that the applicants have a fair
chance. Suppose dive keeper is linked
with respectable man, is itnot evident
that people might under such stress
sign double barreled petition in anxiety
to get rid of the dive keeper? In the
courts man has right to demand
severance. Men cannot make a Joint
application for licenses. Every man
must stand on his own merits in making
an application, and the same rule should
apply with regard to the protests. The
Judge was present when this matter was
decided by the board on Saturday.
There is no theory of law or practice
that will justify the linking together of
men in these protests. l know of in
stances where men have signed protests
not against respectable men who have
applied, but against some particular
individual whose name was grouped
with it.
Judge Anderson-You are now testi-
flying.
Mr.. Gage-Yes, sir; but am stating
facts that can be proved. The ordinance
passed by the board was not passed as
prohibition measure, but as a measure
to regulate the issuance of licenses and
wipe out disreputable taverns in the
county. The other side have been firing
in omnibus prohibition remonstrances.
The object is not to see that no one
shall have a license, but that improper
persons shall not receive license.
Judge Anderson-There is nothing in
the law that permits the sitting of the
wishes OF the protestants The law says
if go many protests are made the license
shall not be granted, and has nothing
to do with the hidden wishes of the pro-
testants. 1t does not say whether single |
or double protests shall be made. 1t
would be the merest technicality to
throw out these protests because they
are joint protests. These citizens pro-
test against each one of these appli-
cants.
Mr.. Gage-I desire to give notice that
we will contest all of the registrations
made by Mr.. Rush at Ell Monte which
are void for the reason that he is
sworn justice of the peace of this county
at Ell Monte and could not legally act
as county clerk and receive those reg
Justice of the Peace Rush-I came
from a country where they raise corn