The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1900-03-15
SUBURBAN
RESIDENTS
STIRRED UP.
They Were Very Much in Evidence
81 the Special Meeting Of County
Commissioners.
PLEASANT VALLEY PARK CASE
Argued by Attorneys, and Then Pres
ident McGregor Rules the Mat
ter Cannot be Considered.

suburban residents, especially those
Of Pleasant valley, were very much in
evidence at the special meeting Of the
board Of county commissioners yester-
day afternoon. at which, at the request
ana at the expense of Messrs. Bader &
Maurer, the Pleasant Valley Park case
was reopened and legal arguments
heard by The board from attorneys for
the proprietors Of the park and from
counsel for the municipality Of Pleasant
Valley. The board, 1t will be remember
ed. declined to grant a county license,
because the council OF Pleasant Valley
had declined to grant town license.
In this action the board relied upon the
opinion OF Its legal adviser, Prosecuting
Attorney Meyer. Messrs. Bader q
Maurer then had the special meeting
called, so that their attorney, Mr. Ber-
ME Handlan. might adduce further legal
arguments in their behalf.
The meeting was called to order at 2
O'Clock. The petition of the applicants
Tor license was read, also petition to
the board from suburban residents ask
ing that license be not granted.
Mr.. Bernie Handlan addressed the
board in behalf Of the applicants. The
question was, he said, whether or not
the board had the right to grant the
iicense without license having been
granted by the Pleasant Valley council
He cited section 40, article of the con-
atitution Of the state of West Virginia,
which is In effect that laws may be
nassed regulating the sale Of intoxi-
eating LIQUORS. He also cited section 10
Of chapter 80, which provides that a
town may punish for the doing Of an
act without the town license having
been granted even though state
llcense had been granted, the inference
being that liquor could be sold without
the town license; otherwise there would
be no sense at all in the provision
quoted. MIR. Handlan then quoted the
decision OF Judge Green in the case OF
MoundsvIlle w. Fountain, q w VI
2os In which the court says that either
license (state or town. can be had with
out the other. Referring to the eonstI-
tuttonal provision on which the board
had previously acted adversely, the at
torney held 1t was merely directory and
not mandatory.
For the town of Pleasant valley,
1;essrs. Ersklne and Allison spoke, and
,aId great stress on the constitutional
prohibition against the granting OF
STAT, license within the limits Of an IN
qorporated town, village or city. in cases
where the municipality refuses license
Thts provision in the constitution IS IN
the following language:
Provided That no license for the sale OF
i'stoXicnt,ug liquors In any incorporates
eitv Town or village shall be granted with
Oui the consent OF the municipal 9utnOEl-
ties thereof first had ana oDIhlhen'
rhe argument of Mr.. VIM. Erskine'
for the town Of Pleasant Valley, was
in effect as follows:
MY argument on this question shall
be brief. In order that 1t may be thor
oughly condensed and because was
not sure that other engagements woulu
permit me to be personally present this
afternoon, l have It all written out.
"The people Of this state, through the
constitution Of the state, have maue
and declared the law Of the state on
this question of granting license
without the consent OF the local author-
tiles in no uncertain terms.
'ArticIe eight OF the constitution es-
tahlishes the county courts and pro-
vIdes for your board having control OF
the polFce and fiscal affairs OF this
county the same as II you were named
the county court, After enumeruting
your powers in regard to police ana
fiscal affairs in broad terms, 1t ndds'
(In Sec. "a Of Art. 81
provided, That no license for the
sale of intoxicating liquors TN any IN.
corporated city, town or village, snall
be granted without the consent OF the
municipal authorities thereof, hrst
had and obtained
.1The people Of the state have thus
written in their constitution one right
which they intended the people OF ev-
cry local community should haVe-the
right of protection against the evils OF
close contact with a saloon. That pro-
vision Of the constitution Is the supreme
law Of the state on the subject. inc
Legislature could never annul It, and
has never attempted to do 50; but on
the contrary has, as you can plainly
see, passed a law to carry It out.
"The people OF the state have, IN
clause three OF the first article OF the
constitution. made general statement
as to the duty Of adheFiRg to the tun'
damental provisions Of that supreme
law as follows:
1.-THE provisions OF the constitutions q
the United States, and Of this state, are
operative alike In period Of war as In
time OF peace. and any departure
therefrOm. or violation thereof, undef
the plea Of necessity, or any other plea,