The evening times., 1897-02-13
THE NEWsBOYs WERE TRIED
Argument in the Case Resumed
Before Judge Kimball.
THREE LITTLE DEFENDANTS
Gen. Birney and Maj. Darlington
Contended That the Enabling Act
Only Authorized the Commission
ers TO Proceed Against loud
and Unusual Noises"

Legal lights that do not often shine in
the police court were urged into appearing
there today by the danger which threat
ems the little purveyors of Sunday papers
under tie new ordinance, the test case
under which was continued from last
Tuesday.
Charles McCauley, Marshall Johnson and
Leo Gray, the defendants, were again
brought into court by the Secular League,
who seem to have taken charge OF them, and
seated on the chairs set aside for officers,
and tried to follow the learned arguments
of their counsel. But utterly bewildered
they gave up in despolr after the first
sentence or two, and permitted their eyes
and attention TO wander curiously over
the strange scene and faces before them
Gen William Birney and Major j. Nc
Dowell Darlington appeared for the boys
and herprominent tmembers Of the Secular
League were also present. When the
charge was read, Gen. Birney rose and
entered a demurrer. II concede,' he said,
"that Congress can delegate TO the Com
missioners power in all municipal matters,
but not the power To change common law.
We have to decide what the power is that
was delegated to the Commissioners in
this instance
Chief Justice Bingham, he said, held
in the case of the law I'm District re-
garding Sunday closing that the power
granted municipality is special, and must
be strictly construed. Section of the
enrolling act gives the Commissioners
the authority to regulate and prohibit
loud noises and cries upon the public streets.
These are the restrictions upon the case;
the regulation must be usual and reasonable,
andthecriesmust be loud.
The order reads that newsboys may cry
their papers on secular days and otherwise.
This ordinance, he held, was not usual,
particularly not in this District.
lis usual in this connection confined
to the District?'' asked Judge Kimball.
The court OF appeals in a recent decision
with regard to stopping trains ON Sunday
held that it meant with regard to the
community at large"
II will waive that point for the present"
answered Gen. Brney. The heading
OF this section is to prevent needless
noise or outcry.' / submit, your honor.
that this is not a reasopable ruling
There would be a hard time for the babies
IL it were. The regulation does not say
where the noise is wrong. Why,it might be
in ones own house. | claim that the
ordinance Is much wider than the enabling
act and that there are restrictions in
this act which have not been confOrmed
20. u Is said in the ordinance that the
newsboys may cry extra editions OF
papers on extraordinary occasions. The
information does not allege that the
occasion on which the boys were ar
rested was not an extraordinary one.
Therefore | ask that the charge be
quaShed."
Mai Carrington said: We ask, your
honor, have not the Commissioners mad
vertently done a thing which is unjust
and unreasonable? TIE enabling law
confers upon the Commissioners power to
regulate loud noises. Now, | maintain
that nc authority was delegated TO the
Commissioners to regulate anything but
disorderly and unusual noises. Must we
walk about the streets with bated breath,
not even sneezng? Must tie babies be
stilled? Was the regulation intended TO
quiet the voice OF a tiny boy, who, cry
ing in his weak voice, New York Pa
pers, Is arrested by the policemen, when
not even q weak-nerved old lady com
planned?
The information charges the boys with
crying papers on Sunday and not with
making loud noises in the streets The
order gives the newsboys the right to
cry their wares between the hours of
and O'Clock on secular days. Ought the
newsboys take off their hats to the Com-
mfssioners and thank them for this right?
Why, it is theirs by common law. The
reading of the ordinance is pure nonsense.
Unless they become nuisances, in which
case they can be arrested as disorderly,
they have the right to cry out their
wares at any time"
'Do / understand you to say" inter
posed Judge Kimball, that the Com
missioners have not the right to regulate
hucksters' crieS?''
Not unless they become nuisances.'
Prosecutor Pugh, in defending the
Commissioners ordinance, said: The court
OF appeals has recently decided that 10y the
act of 1892 the Commissioners are in
vested with all the Towers and rights held
by similar municipalities. ! claim that
the enabling act and the ordinance mist
be construed together. This ordinance
is not unusual it is found in other cities,
and has been sustained in other ju1isdlc-
tons This proves that it is Ttt rniea-
sonable submit that the ordinance is
right and proper as applicable TO the
streets That is all, your honor"
Before l deliver an opinion in this
case | should like to see the opinion OF
the court of appeals, which has severaltimes
been referred to. l believe il will appear in
next Mondays Law Reporter. will,
therefore, continue the case until il ap-
pears will notify counsel when the case
is again called"
The offenders were again released on
their personal bonds awaiting the de-
cision.