Bridgeton pioneer. (Bridgeton, N.J.) 1884-1919, 1902-05-15


cured. at the Davis hotel; others
didn't profess to know and some
thought it might have come from the
bottling place of Whilden Reeves.
Many Of the witnesses said on CROSS
examination that they were conscien.
tiously opposed to the sale of liquor
and that the hotel would be all right
without the licensd bar. Some op-
posed the license because theyfthought
it would be better for the community
to have the bar closed.
On the part of the petition the evil
dence sounded different. Witnesses
from different parts of the country,
who had been guests at the Davis
Hotel, were called and testified of the
absolute necessity, in their opinion,
OF having hotel at Port Norris. and
it was the consensus of opinion of
these witnesses that hotel could not
be run successfully without licensed
bar. These witnesses were loud in
their praise as to the manner in which
Mr.. and Mrs. Davis conducted their
hotel and the service given to guests.
One witness said the Davis house at
Port Norris was the best hotel in the
State south of Camden.
Among the witnesses called for the
petition were John B. Wilson, Wash
ington, D. c., a representative of the
United States Fish Commission,
whose business compelled him to stop
at the Davis hotel about seven weeks
last fall; Frank G. Baxter, of New
bold Solomon Wilson, of Philadel.
phia, and others.
Some of the witnesses manifested
such unusual interest in the matter at
times that it called forth rather se-
we're cross-examination by the other
side, and there were times during the
hearing when things became rather
interesting.
The hearing is being continued to-
day. The outcome is watched at
great moment by the people of Port
Norris.
Monday Morning.
Court convened at ten O'Clock this
morning before Judge Trenchard.
The appeal list was taken up and dates
fixed for trial of cause.
The Court then announced that the
matter of the confirmation of the re-
port of the Commissioners appointed
to assess benefits accruing from GER
tain paved streets in city of Bridgeton,
would be taken up, and that he would
listen to anyone who had anything to
say either for or against the report.
1t will be remembered that this report
OF the Commissioners was to the
effect that no special assessment
should be made upon abuttiug prop
erty owners, but that the cost should
be covered by general tax assessment.
The Court hesitated in confirming
the report last Monday and set to-day
for hearing of opinions of citizens.
"A Adi 60 Au1A DCI VI ClGlZCuS were
present in Court, who were repre-
sented by Lawyer Walter H. Bacon.
The learned gentleman directed the
attention of the Court to the act un-
der which the public Improvement
had been made, and commented on
the terms of the act at considerable
moth Mr. Paonntc
that the report, having been made
in this case in compliance with the
act, must be confirmed. The commits
sion, in Mr. Baoon's opinion, had
placed the burden where it rightfully
belonged-on the general taxpayer-as
it was upon the wish of the general
taxpayer that the improvements had
been made
Isaac T. Nichols appeared be-
fore the Court on behalf of the City
Council, in opposition to the confirma-
tion of the report of the Commission
erS.
The Court said that it seemed there
had been misconception of the
terms of the act by the Commission.
Some benefits should have been recog-
nized by the Commissioners. The
amount of the benefits was no cues
tion for the Court, but to confirm this
report as it stands seemed to be- i'm
proper at this time. However. no
final decision was given by the Court
in the matter.
From Daily Pioneer, Tuesday May ls
The discussion, pro and con, over
the confirmation of the report of the
Commissioners appointed to assess
benefits accruing to abutting property
owners along the newly paved streets
of this city, occupied the entire morn
ing session of Court yesterday, at the
conclusion of which Judge Trenchard
announced that he would make final
disposition of the report at ten O'Clock