Waterbury Democrat., 1902-09-13
KENNY'S LICENSE
Hotly Contested in the District
 Court Room To-day.
REMoNsTRANTs WERE PRESENT

Mrs Sarah M. Donaldson Matron of
 the Southmayd Home Headed Them
 Father Crowley Was Also One of
 the Remonstrants-Th Granting
 of a License to the Pasternak Broth
 CTS Was Also Objected to By the
 Same Remonstrants.
 The remonstrance against granting liquor license to Frank M. Kenny at S04 North Main street was heard in the district court room this forenoon by County Commissioners Walter, Brewer and Thompson. The remon- strance was based on the grounds that the place mentioned in the application is an unsuitable one for liquor busi- ness and that there are at present sa- looms enough in the place. The re- monstrants are Sarah M. Donaldson, matron of the Southmayd home for old ladies; William B. Brooks, Freder- ick s. Chase, w. A. Holgate, George 10. Young, W. W. Tower, Peter Hook, Samuel 2 Mccormack, M. N. Upson, Charles E. Welch, w. J. Larkin, Ed- ward D. Bassett and IT. M. Crowley ALLOIlSy DuIdllL dppGdIGu IOT LuG dp- plicant and Prosecuting Agent Pierce and Attorney Hunt for the remon- monstrants. The first witness was the applicant, Kenny. He testified that he had been thirty-four years in the city and that he is now engaged in the tea and coffee business with Will liam Balfe Ten years ago, he said, there was a population of about 2,600 hi 1o.&f-on <,F 1<< .G North Main street; now there is about 6,000 Then there were five places of business; now there are thirty, in- cludfng two saloons. Under cross ex- animation he gave the character of places, and said that in his opinion few more saloons were necessary in the place
 against granting the Pasternak Bros a liquor license and the objectors were the same as in the other case It was rumored that there was a third application objected to, but none of the commissioners knew anything of this, if there was such case AttorA ney Durant had over a score of wit nesses to show that there was reason
 
 there should be more than two saloons there. He called upon Thomas Fa- gan, David Stein, the tailor, Eugene partner, A. Eyre, John J. Carroll, James OsKeefe, J. D. Brown, John J. Geraghty, Walter Watts, MT Beach of Green street, and MT Mendelssohn of Wood street At this point he 4 I,a 1a fs was understood between counsel that all who were not called would testify to the same Then began the remon- strants' case MT LarlSin, superin- tendent of the Waterbury Clock fac- tory, was the first called He said he objected to the two licenses now in Op- eration. ID. c Smith was the next and w. w. Tower was perhaps the most emphatic and positive remon- strant Alderman Stanley had no use for any more saloons in the locality because, said he, i've can get all we want now from the drug stores" This statement seemed to cause consider able surprise. 1t was the opinion of MT Tower also, that the existence of the drug stores negatived the necessity of any more saloons. He said the
 
 "The first we knew" said he, they were bottling ale," (meaning the drug store keeper) "and then he branched out into a saloon.' This caused a great surprise for no such transforma- tion was in the knowledge of anybody else MT Towers objection to saloons was their. effect on property 'They will have the same effect on our prop erty," said he, 'fas they had on Bishop street." He said the notice that should be placed on the door of No 767, was pasted on the hall door of 760 and it was by the merest accident that he saw it. He had to jump over a fence and some other obstacles to get close enough to see what it was The remonstrants are putting up Q great contest. There is a number of witnesses to be examined.