The Washington times., 1901-08-06
AFFAIRS OF THE DISTRICT.
The Attorney for the Anti-SalOOu
League Presents His Views.
Granting of Hotel Licenses Review
ed in Opposition to a. Previous
0piuiop-Sch uIcs of TaI<omn Park
Cars Fires During Last Month.

A E. Shoemaker. attorney for the Anti
Saloon League of the District of Colum-
bia yesterday submitted to the Commits
sioners communication in the nature of
a review and reply to recently sub
mitted opinion of the Attorney for the
District. The opinion pertains to the
right of the Excise Board to grant a Ii
ccIse to sell liquor to a hotel which has
complied with all the requirements of the
law. but has bad reputation as the re
.ort of disreputable characters, and so
long as there is no actual violation of the
excise law The question also involved
second. which was that if the former
proposition should be answered in the af-
firmative the Excise Board has discre-
tioaary judgment as TO what constitutes
an established hotel
The opinion of the Attorney was in
effect that when the hotel has complied
with the requirements of the law 1t is
entitled to a license. and that the question
of its beng the resort Of bad characters
is matter for police cognizance- The
Attorney states that bad reputation of
hotel would not warrant the Excise
Board in Withholding a license if the re-
quirements of the law otherwise were
complied with.
In his communication to the Comms-
sionors Mr. Shoemaker says that much
of the Attorneys reasoning is thoroughly
in accordance with his own views. but he
thinks that the Attorney fails to carry
his rcasorings to their ultimate conclu-
sion. Mr. Shoemaker admits that hotel
having the requisite number of rooms for
lodging guests has the right to a bar
room license. but he maintains that it
must be a hotel in the proper sense of
the term under the-Iaw. 1t must have
twenty-five rooms for lodging guests, and
/ Mr.. Shoemaker calls attention to de-
cision of the Court of Appeals in which it
was made plain that a house is not
hotel necessarily because il mas twenty
five or more rooms and is called hotel.
As quoted the court said that it was the
duty of the Excise Board to determine
whether the applicant for license is in
fact and in good faith the owner
lessee of hotel and whether the house
is in the sense of the law an established
hotel Mir. Shoemaker says that it is
clearly the duty of the Excise Board to
investigate the character OF any hotel
that seeks a liquor license. and that they
must be satisfied that II is 'estab
lished hotel, with the requisite number
of rooms, that it has complied with the
terms of the law, and that it is in the
proper sense hotel or tavern.
Mr.. Shoemaker argues that il hotel
or tavern has a bad reputation. if it is
a resort of disreputable characters, and
If unmarried couples register as man and
wife. and with the knowledge of the pro-
prietor occupy, the same room and bed,
it is an immoral house. and an immoral
house is a disorderly house"
Mr.. Shoemaker submits a long argument
TO show that the opinion of the Attorney
for the District Is untenable, and sums
up the matter as follows:
THE Court OF Appeals in the case of
Washington VS.. johnson, better known
as the Douglas House cause, decided it
to be the duty of the Excise Board TO
investigate and determine whether or not
house purporting to be hotel and
applying for a barroom license is in the
proper sense an established hotel before
granting ii license
The Court OF Appeals in the same case
decided that the Excise Board did their
duty under the law. when they refused
license to the Douglas Hotel, because
upon investigation they found that it was
an immoral or disorderly house and not
in the proper sense a hotel or tavern.
THE statement of facts submitted by
the Excise Board make the house in ques-
as was the Douglas House, and as such
is not entitled to license.
''The Excise Board should Cooperate
with the Police Department III so far as
may be in their power in the task of
suppressing disorderly houses such as a
house used primarily and regularly as a
place OF aSsignation or as a bawdy house
with the fun knowledge of the proprie-
tor. and to this end they should refuse to
issue liquor license to them.
The clause in the concluding paragraph
Of section OF the act of 1888, prohibiting
the Excise Board from revoking the IL
cense of the keeper Of disorGerly dis
reputableaAonse until he may be convicted
Of keeping such house does not apply di-
rectly to the case in question
Mr.. Shoemaker submits that in view of
these considerations it is the duty OF the
Excise Board to refuse to issue license
TO sell liquor to the house in question so
long as IL is conducted in the manner al
legged.
The Brightwood Railway Company and
the Washington, ..Woodside and Forest
Glen Railway Company recently sub
mitted to the Commissioners a schedule
of operating cars on the said railroads
and asked that It be favorably considered.
The schedule was practically the one in
operation on those roads for several
months past. An inspection was made
and though 1t was reported that the sche-
OF travel it apparently contrary to
the requirements of the charter of the
company. The question was referred to
the Attorney for the District and he yes
tCrday submitted his opinion. rs follows:
The proposed schedule appears TO
comply with the charter requirements at
all hours of the day for that portion of
the line from Florida Avenue to the juno
tion "a Umatilia Street, but from said
junction TO TakOma Park and from the
junction to the District limo the schedule
interval exceeds the charter limits by iif-
teen minutes at all hours of the day cX-
cept from 40 to I:35 4. N. and from i:l0 to
?, NJ
tOber IS 1885 Incorporating the Bright
wood Railway Company authorized the
construction Of its road from Boundary
Street and Brightwood Avenue on the
! south TO the boundary of the District and
BrightwoOd Avenue on the north
Section 10 of said act required the COM
pany to - run cars thereon as
4 often as the public convenience may re-
quire, in accordance with a table or
schedule fixed by the company a CODY of
which shall be filed with the Commissions
ers Of the District of Columbia and APP
proved by them.
The original charter of the Bright
wood Railway Company was amended by
Congress July 26, 1892, and the company
was required to operate its line with the
overhead trolley system of electric mo-
tive power and to provide new cars of
the most approved pattern, which shall
be run public convenience shall require,
but not less frequently than one car every
fifteen minutes from each end Of the line
between O'Clock ante meridian and y
O'Clock midnight
Section OF said amendment provides
that any failure to comply with any of
the provisions OF this act shall work
forfeiture of the original charter of said
Brightwood Railway Company on
February 27 1893. the charter of the
company was further amended. and the