The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-06-09
MUST PAY THE FINE.
Jehn Ceasidins Found Guilty
q Charged.
~ AssGAL NOT SUCCESSFUL.


Ths nsaieipsi esurt roon vas Aaisd
vith spectators yesterday morning q hsar
~ deeision Of Judge Giasgov ID the esss
- The city Of Seattle against J. J. Clark
aaa JeAn W. ConsidIns. charged With con-
ductiig theates In which intoxic.srne
iiquers vsrs sold The dsfsndants were
found guilty and fnsd so sAeh. Throaeh
tAsir counsel they gave immediats nosirs
efappeal, and nos10sd Corporsxion Couu.
~ Scott and City Attorney Winssoek that
- lo'c3ook application would b made In
the snpssioF court. before Judgs Humsn.
Tor . Temporary resfrainine order % en-
Join CAisf cf Police Rogers ftom cIosine
the Psopis's thsassr-
The decision of ths municipal court was
ons Of 1sf-rsaching tmportance, and afssr
f1ii argument wss decided by the munich
pal court In favor Of the city. The conten-
tion OF the defendant vas that the city
had no power 10 pass IN ordinance pro-
limiting the carrying on Of shsster in
coansction with or adjoining saloon:
that Clark having paid his licsnse before
the passage 81 The ordinance under which
hs was prosecuted. his ficsnss was mos ~
voked hy the passage Of the ordinance.
SNS R$6oe&04 0VNs41UA OCOAo C006U0QOQ
that the city has power under the grant
given it BY the tsEislaturs and by virtue
a the charter % further regulate and ~
strain thsatsrs. etc. and by providing
that such thsatss, etc. should not b con-
Quoted In any place in connection
With Or adjoining . saloon; thas
thitpowsf was given 20 the city and could
b sxercissd BY Il In the interest Of pubic
mosaiity. and that the actioa Of the city
council In providing penalties for the con.
Quoting Of such places invoked the license:
hat the action Of the city council in such
matters was final and conclusivs. and thas
there 10 no contractsal Obligation between
the city and the iiesnses By which any
vested rights uere given under the licenss,
but that the issuAnce of tho license Vas
msrsly permit - conduct the business
during the pleasure Of the municipal au-
thoritiea
Judge Glasgow thoroughly reviewed the
autAosities In a able and con vincin
manner. holding With the corporation
sounpsi and the city attorney upon ell the
mater1al questions Involved In the case.
Clark Crawford immsdiately prepared
the Transcript which 1as then flsd In the
supeFioe court
AZ Z o'clock John wiley, representing
the defendants, snd ". !. Scott and n.
g. Winstock, sspssssnting the city, were
present In the superior court, but Judge
Humes, having finished the business q
The day and mos having been notified con.
corning the rsstrainini order, Wa not
upon the bench. The parties Appeared
before Judge Osborn, Who decided that,
newiAw 49, ~ TT 4 "a a..
merits would probably b dstsrminsd in
another department. Of The superior court
he would not interfere.
The application Tor . restraining order
came mp before Judge Humss ct I:3O In
the evening. The petition allagss the
payment Of the taoatsr license By Consi-
dine - manager for Clark, and Of the
saloon license BY Thomas Fleming d Co !;
the arrest oe Edgar Clay and Walter
Nsakim, the musicians: that Clark was
duly authorised to conduct . variety
thsa4sr, bus that Considins vas con victsd
By Judgs Glasgow Of violating the new
ordnance. Considine then says that The
new ordinance does not purpors 10 and does
not revoke the license. which was full
protsction 10 him and his employees, but
that Chief Rogers threatens him and his
employees with aIrset, and has compelled
him to abandon his businsss: that the
city claims the right to summaE,ly close
the theater. and has greatly injured
the plaintiff; thai the clty 10 inaolvsnt
and unable 70 msse it obligations. and has
no means With whieh to pay damages for
the injury done the plaintiff He asked
IN injunctioa restraining the closing u
his placo and the arrosk Of hfn emnlovou
pending the decision Of the ease on sp-
peal
Mr.. Wiley proceeded to argue that the
ordinance was unconstitutional. II con.
tanned no provision to rsvoks licenses, but
vas simply 70 regulate certain places Of
amusement The oedinancs contained NO
provision suspending licenses, bat rspsalsd
shs ordinance licsnsing shows The title
called the ordnance one to regulate the
business, while The provisions were pro-
hibitory and the terms regulate and PRO-
hibit were entirely incongruous. A num-
Der Of citations were made In support Of
the contention thss power to regulate did
mos carry with 10 power 70 prohibit The
Law Of this state giving power 70 regulate
or prohibit the liquor trafhc did not cover
the case, for the ordinance only dealt with
thsatsrs in which liquors we're sold, and
nos with the liquor trafie.
Mr.. Scott. in rsply to the court, said
"