The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-02-14

but he didn't get 1t because there was q
remonstrance against him.
In explanation OF this statement Mr.
Nixon said that when the remonstrance
was first presented the name OF the owner
OF a large part OF the property represented
within the 200 feet limit was improperly
given. 1t then appeared that the neces-
sary amount OF property was not repre-
sented on the petition for refusal. Later,
however, the actual owner OF this prop
erty protested so that the board could do
nothing else under the law but refuse to
issue the license.
"Then," said Mr.. Mccarthy, "only
399 licenses were issued?"
"Only 500, (" answered the witness.
Mr.. Nixon explained that every year
from 40 to so were refused. These were
from new men and the practice OF the
board was to grant the licenses to the
men previously established In the busi-
ness.
The remonstrances against the transfer
were then read by Mr.. Mccarthy. One
was dated Dec. 8, while the other had no
date, but Mr.. Nixon said 1t was received
shortly after the first one. Both came
In after the vote TO grant the transfer,
but before the endorsement or certificate
of transfer had been issued.
COMMISSIONER BURNHAM's REPORT.
"Did the board consider these remon.
strances?" Mr.. Mccarthy asked.
"Only to see how much property was
represented on them"
"Who investigated that natter"
M B~urnhaD."
"He made no report TO the board!"
"Yes, he did"
"Where is that report?"
In response to this Mr.. Nixon produced
a paper containing the names OF the re-
monstrants and the number OF feet OF
land owned by each.
Didn't Mr.. Burnham make a written
report?'' queried Chairman Fuller.
"Ile did not. He took the plat and went
over it to see how much each party who
objected owned"
Ibid he go near the premises?"
81 cannot say"
sis that all the report Mr.. Burnham
made?n
Eyes; that report shows the number
OF feet each party owns
"Well," remarked Chairman Fuller,
SD like to have Mr.. Burnham make a re-
port for me-" and he sat down with such
emphasis that everybody knew he
wouldn't,have a report from Mr.. Burn
ham at any price.
AT this point Mr.. Nixon discovered the
written report OF Mr.. Burnham and hand
ed it to Mr.. Mccarthy. That gentle
man glanced at 1t a moment and then in
seductive tones inquired If it was not in
consequence of the remonstrance received
0f y ~ AAAa A'LAs ~ at oe
gated the land holdings OF the remon-
strants. Mr.. Nixon replied that It was.
THE POINT HI FAILED.
"And this is the report made by Mr..
Burnham, is it not?" he asked in hushed
and portentous accents.
alt is" responded Mr.. Nixon.
"Will you tell me-, " quoth Mr.. Nectar
thy fundamentally, as he pointed the
| paper at Mr.. Nixon, show a report on
Investigation happened to be made on
October 9Th on q remonstrance that was
not filed until Dec. 81"
A great point, but what an early death
ii died. Mr.. Mccarthy had barely recov-
cred his poise after launching this terrific
blow when Committeeman Burbank re-
marked that Mr.. Mccarthy was slightly
in error in his last assumption as the
paper dated Oct. s, which he as.
sumed was Mr.. Burnham's report, was not
the report of that gentleman at all, but
q remonstrance. Mr.. Mccarthy pulled
himself together as gracefully as the cir
cumtance would permit and expressed
his regret at having made remarks based
upon a wrong assumption. He disclaim-
ed any intention whatever OF taking adj
vantage of the mistake made by Mr.. Nix
on In handing him the wrong paper. Hav-
ing simply glanced at the date, without
reading further, he had assumed that
the paper was the report of Mr.. Burnham.
After this episode Mr.. Nixon was fur
Their examined as to the date when Mr..
Burnham's report was made. but could
not fix the date, and on other points re-
lating to the time Of filing the remon-
strances.
Finally Chairman Fuller asked II any
new licenses had been issued since une 8
last. Mr.. Nixon, after examining his
books, replied that new licenses had been
issued on June Ia.
SHOW IL it," continued the chairman,
"that you refused Dorsey Brothers appli-
cation on the 9Th because you say the limit
had been reached and then grant others
later on"
Mr.. Nixon replied that he had not said
that the 400 limit had been reached when
the Dorsey application came up. The
chairman replied that such was his un-
derstanding of his testimony and request
ed the stenographer TO read his notes of
that part Of Mr.. Nixon's testimony.
While the stenographer was scare hing
for the desired passage, Mr.. Burbank in
CURED ON what date the Doyle license
had been granted and Mr.. Nixon said 1t
was on Nov. Is.
Questioned further by Mr.. Burbank as
to who had the 4O0th license when the
Dorsey application was considered, Mr..
Nixon said the licenses had not all been
granted then, as all the applications of
old dealers had not been acted on.
"Then what you mean is" said Mr..
Burbank, that on the 9th OF June there
were still applications enough from old
dealers to absorb all the ungranted licen-
SEES up to the 400 limit, without granting
any of those OF new applicants, such as
the Dorsey Brothersf"
'''That Is it exactly, and IL ! said other
wise / was mistaken"
Again Mr.. Mccarthy took up the
cudgels. you say there is no remon-
STRANGE against the granting of the Burke
transfer previous to the vote taken by
the board?"
"Not to my recollection"
"Whose writing is that on the back of
that paper" demanded the inquisitor.
''Mr. Burnham's."
"Read t." The witness did as directed
and read the endorsement against license
No. ga Plain street, corner of Bishop;,
Oct. @, 80, Then after a moment, he
added, "That's my handwriting"
''Isn't that a remonstrance against the
Burke Transient"
Mr.. Nixon, after he comprehended the
question, answered that il was.
For the first time during the evening
Committeeman Miner asked a question.