The Morris County chronicle. [volume] (Morristown, N.J.) 1877-1915, 1898-01-14
ANOTHER EXCISE SHOW
Application to Revoke COnway's
License Denied.

History of the Case and the Legal Points
Again overhauIed by Alfred Mills,
Counsel of Citizens, and by George w.
Forsythe and Samuel j. Mcdonald as
Attorneys for Conway-Explanation of
the Vote to Deny Revocation Made by
Commissioner sturgIs.
Members of the Board of Excise Com
missioners are congratulating themselves
upon the final settlement on Wednesday
evening of the Conway license question,
which has been before the Commission
for FIVE months past. Many citizens de-
plore the action of the Commission in
denying the application to revoke the
license and some are still openly object
ing to the final settlement.
The meeting on Wednesday evening
was doubtless the most interesting and
amusing yet held by that notable, if not
notorious body. A meeting held on
December 22nd was ended by resolu-
ton to notify A. P Conway to appear
before the board and show cause why his
license should not be revoked. But ex-
Counsellor Forsythe, counsel for Con-
way, at the opening of the meeting on
Wednesday evening said that no direct
or specific charges had yet been made
against Conway, therefore no defense
could be made.
Alfred Mills, counsel for the Citizens
Committee, objected to the course, said
that the purpose of the meeting was
plain; Conway had been present by
counsel at several previous meetings
where the question had been discuss
ed and held that it was the duty of the
Board to then call upon counsel of the
defendant to show cause as stated.
Thereupon, Mr.. Forsyth, introduced
to the Board, one Samuel J. Mcdonald,
representing the firm of johnson & Ger
man of Newark, who at once took up the
case and reviewed it from legal and
other stand points traversipg much the
same ground as covered before, denying
the allegation of fraud in securing the
license and finally declaring that the
board could not revoke without first
passing an ordinance.
Following this, Mr.. Mills made a
strong speech in favor of revocation,
holding that the Board on December %
practically declared that it had the
power to revoke without ordinance by
voting to notify Conway to appear and
show cause. He still held that Conway
had practieed fraud in representing to
the board that he was man of good
character and not guilty of the crimes
alleged against him and for which he
then stood indicted of which he
and afterwards admitted his guilt.
He reviewed, as at previous meet
ings, the acts bearing upon the sub
ject, urged the board in the name of its
own intelligence and the right to revoke
the license. Several points of argument
were taken up for rebuttal by the coun-
sci for the defendant and withal there
was much law passed, most of which has
been reported in detail in the CHRONICLE
heretofore.
The Commissioners finally declared a
recess for consideration of the question,
reappearing after about half an hour.
Then Commissioner ID. F. Sturgis took
the floor and after explaining that the
Board had carefully considered the
question in its every light and that
taking all things in consideration, par
ticularly the fact that Conway was at
present suffering the penalty of all
crimes committed, and if the license
was revoked would lose the $3.50 paid
for his license, moved that the applica-
tion to revoke the license be denied.
The motion passed unanimously and the
large audience filed slowly out.