The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-03-15
LICENSE COURT
BEGINS ITS WORK
Seven Hundred Applications Are Before
the Judges
SOMH LIVELY OPPOSITION SHOWN
Arthur Dunn and W. w.
Lathrope Appear for a Number of
Romonstrances--J n Question
as to Whether or Not the Brewery
Combine Can Secure License for
More Than One Piace--Haif the
List Gone Over.

year, stared court in the face yester-
day when it began its annual and dis
tasteful license" session.
After the decks had been cleared of
the customary opening day motions
and the like, the judges announced that
they were ready to hear license applica-
tions. There were about hundred at
torneys present when Judge Archibald
gave out to the gentlemen of the bar"
that the custom in vogue in former
years could again be followed in going
over the list of applicants.
When q name was called the attorney
representing the application would an
swer new" or "old" house as the case
might be. If it was new" house the
attorney would be required to show
what reasons there were for licensing
a new house at that place. If 1t was
an "old" house, it would be only ne
cessary to announce that fact when
the applicants name was called, and
court would go on to the next, unless
it happened that there was a remon-
STRANGE against it, in which case, the
attorneys would present their argu-
ments briefly.
About half the list was thus gone
over before adiourning time. This
morning the Olyphant borough licenses
will be disposed of and then will come
those from the city of Scranton.
WANTS TO HEAR ARGUMENTS.
When the Pennsylvania Central
Brewing company's application for Ii
cense for it's Carbondale brewery was
presented by eX-Judge Knapp, court
raised a question as to the legality of
granting a brewery license to a party
having an interest In another brewery
in the same county. There is nothing
in the statutes expressly permitting it
and the court was not satisfied but that
by implication the law prohibited it.
Court intimated that it did not see
any serious difficulty to the granting
of the licenses, but still would like to
hear arguments Oh these points.
The applications from Dunmore de-
veloped a number of conflicts. Fred
PetZinger made objection to his sister,
in-law, Mary Petzinger, alleging that
she was not a citizen, or in other words
that her divorced husband had never
been naturalized. He did not appear,
however, to back up his objection. At
torney J. G. Lange, attorney for the
applicant, denied the allegation.
Os ,
a license in the Sixth ward of Dunmore
was opposed by a number of remon-
strants headed by Attorney Arthur
Dunn. William Skipper, special officer
of the ward, went on the stand and
in answer to questions by Mr.. Dunn,
said the house for which Dougherty
wants license is tenanted by -four
families and that the said families are
,in 4 nf yhn
in Mr.. Shippers opinion, become even
more riotous If there was drinking
place established in the basement, as
contemplated. This is the building in
| which a baby was shot and killed dur
| ing family brawl last May. Mr..
| Scragg, representing the application,
showed that the house was a three
story structure, admirably suited for
hotel purpose and that Mr.. Dougherty
is a reputable man who will conduct
an orderly house.
NO NECESSITY FOR IT.
The same opponents appeared
| against the application of John Uhase,
| of Iarch street, contending that there
| was no necessity for the place. At
torney John j. Murphy, who appeared
| for the application, said it might be
| true that there was no necessity of a
hotel in that locality for the "men,
women and children" who signed the
remcnstrance but for Mr.. Uhases coun-
trymen who lived there in great num-
| bers there was necessity.
Michael Manley's application from
the same neighborhood was similarly
opposed. Mr.. Mckinley. representing
| the application, made the statement
that on the sustaining petition ap-
| peared the names of three men whose
| wives he'd signed the remonstrance.
| Mr.. Dunn made the allegation that
Burgess Powell had told him the place
was conducted as a speak-easy.
Attorney w. w. Lathrope appeared
| in opposition to the application of Max
Heller of Blazing Stump" at Rich
mondale. He alleged it was not neces-
sary.
Attorney H. c. Butler is asking for
a license for John Owens, of Fell, said
that court had listened all day long to
applications grounded on reasons to
the effect that they were to be for
| the accommodation of the Polish, Ital-
| ian or Hungarian residents of the To-
| cality. He would ask for a hotel Ii
| cense for the accommodation of the
| American people of the neighborhood.
| He then read the list Of applicants
| from Fell and everyone of them, eX-
cepting owens, bore a foreign-sounding
name.
Mr.. Timlin followed with the appli-
cation of James Mudowney and start
ed in with the assertion MY man is a
| Welshman."
What. Muldowney a Welshman?"
asked Judge Edwards in surprise.
That's what he swears to, Your
Honor" said Mr.. Timlin.
"Well, that is the first time / ever
heard of a man named Muldowney be-
ing a Welshman," rejoined Judge Ed
wards. at which there was general
| laughter.
APPLICATION FROM WINNERS.
Mr.. Fleitz and Mr.. Lathrope put up
strong arguments, respectively, for
and against the application of H. c.
Bell, of WINNERS. Mr.. Fleitz claimed
that two-thirds of the voting popula-
tion of Jefferson township. had signed
the petition, while only forty-five men
and forty women attached their names
to the remonstrance.
Mr.. Lathrope questioned Mr.. Fleitz
assertion that two-thirds of the vot-
ing population was in favor of the
license being granted THAT town
gave a majority for DIR. Swallow and
me last fall and / hardly think sc
many OF. them have gone back on their
convictions in so short a time"
well, If you think that all the peo-
pie who voted for DR.. Swallow last