Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-05-24
THE LIQUOR LAW TEST CASE.
Henry Bush. Convicted in the Police Court
Now Before the Court of Appeals.

Henry Bush. Convicted in the Police Court,
Now Before the Court of Appeals.
This morning the case of Henry Bush,
convicted in the Police Court on the
9th of March last on an informa-
ton charging him with keeping a
bar room contrary to the provisions of the act
of Congress regulating the liquor traffic in the
District, approved March 8, 1898. was
taken up in the Court of Appeals. the
District being represented by Mr.. S. T.
Thomas, the attorney for the District, and by
his assistant, Mr.. James L. Pugh, jr. The
plaintiff in error, Bush, was represented by
Gen. William Birney and Mr.. Henry E. Davis
Mr.. A. S. Worthington also appeared IN the
case as the repres entative of a number Of deal
ers not directly in the case, who would be
equally affected by the enforcement of the act
The court room was crowded when the argu-
ments were commenced, majority of those
present being persons engaged in the liquor
traffic in the District
MR.. wORTHINGToN's OPENING.
Mr.. Worthington opened the case for the
plaintiff in error. Bush, briefly outlining the
case. He stated that the main ques-
of March 8, 1898, prohibited those dealers in
possession Of licenses granted under the old
law from continuing IN business I'M
der those licenses during the remainder
Of the license year. He conceded that
the granting OF a license under the old law
being annulled by an act of Congress, but
he did contend that the new law
neither contemplated nor in fact did
revoke existing licenses. In support Of
his contention that Congress did not
intend that such thing should
ho BOD
thoritles which he claimed held that even
where the sale of liquor was prohibited
| licenses previously granted for its sale could
not be disturbed. In the present case the Dis
trict virtually said that the money paid under
the old law for licenses would be refunded, but
that new licenses, at much higher rates, should
be taken out.
Judge Morris-"Would it not require an act
Of Congress to refund the money already paid
iu?"
Mr.. Worthington- Eyes, sir. There is no
question as to that your honor"
Continuing, Mr.. Worthngton said that the
license year in the District for twenty-five
wears had run from November to Novem-
Der /, and the licenses in force
at the passage of the new law
ran from November /, 1892, to November l,
1893. If the new law. construed in the
Bush case by the Police Court. was held
good, then the absurd proposition would
be maintained that every person who
sold or drank liquor since March 8 last was
equally as guilty. In conclusion, Mr..
Worthington said that the PROPOSE
ton that the new law was a retro
active one was too preposterous for
serious contention, and he felt assured that the
decision of Judge Miller in the Police Court
would not be affirmed by the court.
MR.. BIRNEY's ARGUMENT
Mr.. Birney followed Mr.. worthington for
Bush, saying that the sole offense charged
against his client was that he sold liquor
under license granted under the
old law. In his defense in the Police Court
Bush had offered in evidence tho license
granted him under the old law. but the offer
was overruled, and verdict of guilty
followed Congress. said Mr. Birney, must have
known, and undoubtedly did know, that
some $4,000 had been paid into the
treasury on account Of licenses granted
under the old law, and yet in the
new law no provision made for
a refunding of differences between the old and
new rates. So Congress undoubtedly contem-
plated that the old licenses should continue in
force until the term for which they were
granted.