New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-03-26
RAINES LAW SUSTAINED.
J1ysTTcE PRYOR ASSUMES THAT THE ACT
IS CONSTITUTIONAL.

pRocErDfNcs IN TEST cAsE-THE EXCISE
BOARDS REFUSAL 10 ISSUE LICENsE-THE
MATTER 10 BE CARRIED PROMPTLY
BEFORE THE APPELLATE DIVISION
OF THE SUPREME COURT
.r.e consstut,onality OF the Raines Liquor law
vas upheld By a decision OF Justice Pryor. III '9
Supreme Court yesterday, when the return on '"e
writ OF certiorarl issued BY Justice Beekman on
tho application OF Frederick G. Einsfeio' saioo"
keeper was made before Justice Pryor IN opeciai
Term Part Ill The proceeding was the preimi-
nary skrmish in legal battle which VIII DC
wayed 10 ;es: the constitutonal.ty OF the haines
act. l.,
Eisenfeld has a saloon at No. 50 BeeKnah-s' III
which he has done business Tor ABOUT 'hree 'ea''
His lease and license expired recently. he secure"
a renewal OF his lease and then applied FOR a re-
newa OF his license Inspector Rice. OF the Excise
Board reported favoraby. after investigating E'ns-
fields ct arac;er and recommended a renewal OF VIC
license The Excise Commissioners. In the reso'u
tons adopted by them. which form the DASH Vi
Einsceld's application for a review OF their action
certify that the applicant IS In all respects esioe'
and that their rejection OF the application LOT
license for the coming year Is based entirely upon
the ground that; under the provision OF inc i'a'es
law. which goes into effect on May J. inc poa'u
has authority TO issue licenses only for tho peroa
which ends On April So
Untermyer e. Marshall counsel for the applicant.
when the case was called addressed the Court ana
saad that the case was Of such vast importance
and the facts involved 90 many and coinphca'eu'
that counsel or both sides supposed that the court
would sustain the law ard leave Ii to the Appellate
Division OF the supreme Court TO decide directly OF
the question after all exhaustive treatment VI oo''
tho law points and the facts concerned
Justice Pryor said he would hold the law con-
stituuonal unless its rnconstitutionalty was ap-
parent.
julius NJ. Mayer counsel for the Excise COMMITS
Aoners came In late. and Mr.. UnterInyer theh oe-
tailed the points Of the briefly. Justice Pryor
asked whether Mr. Cntermyer commended pat the
cons,itu uonali,y of the Law was necessarily IN
yolyed He minated that. possibly. the Board mad
not acted sufficient reason
Mr. Mayer hero interposod and said that both
sides we're harmonious that point. and that the
action OF the Beard was eht'fey proper Il ''S
Raines law was constitutional , ,r.
Mr. rAntermyer then argued ca the law PoIh.s,
e to tse ss Of laws Which reqTrsd TO be
passed - two-thircs vote or The Legislature
justice Pryor at the close OF Mr. Untermyers
argument. said the case was OF sucn s[ea ,H
consideration. but that the presumption OF me Iaw
was in favor of the 0l Ins es' were
entitled 10 the benefit of any doubt. ana that.
though e aw has could ID n 5os oe
that political party would dei.oera'eS OYER Yer
ride the safeguards OF the CONSTITUTION Inc JUS
lice said however: ~ is the duty Of the humbest
Judge in the land TO decide against the constltu-
fionality of any law when the circumstances are
plain and the necessity apparent
Mr.. Untermyer asked the Court II he could favor
both sides with a speedy decision. drawing attention
20 the fac, that the old law would be superseded py
the new law unless the latter was overtnrown Dy
a judicial decision The State was already en-
gagged said counsel, in preparing the machinery Tor
license proceedings under the Raines law, ana great
expense could probably be saved to the people by
speedy decision. $1,000.
Justice Pryor said he would let the upper court
decide the points at issue and would Quash the
writ Counse! for Einsfcld will appeal 70 the APP.
rellate Division Of the Supreme Court at once and
Il is expected that the matter will be taken up next