Windham County reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1901-1906, 1906-01-26

George A. Henry, William Wood, com
mittee, Manchester, N. H., Jan. D
! 1906. -
These protests and petitions were pre-
sented BY the committees of the Gen
eral Association of congregational
churches of New Hampshire, the New
hampshire universalist state conven
ton, the New Hampshire Conference
Of the Methodist Episcopal Church, the
New Hampshire Free Baptist yearly
meeting, the New Hampshire Baptist
convention and the New Hampshire
Sunday School association. "These
committees, says the Rev. j. II. Rob
bins, superintendent of the Anti'Saloon
league, "are composed of men carefully
selected TO represent the state dcnomi'
national bodies, and in each ease the
committee is given authority to speak
and act officially for the denomination.
In every ease the members of these
committees gave careful attention to
the matter of the location of the sa-
loon with the license in question, and
to the exact language Of the statute in
relation thereto. The ease is one in
which every church of these denomina-
tions has personal interest through
its official UNCONVENTIONAL representa-.
tive. The headquarters committee of
the Anti.Saloon league held repeated
conferences and sessions over the mat
ter, and unanimously voted to comply
with the request of the trustees of the
Hinsdale Methodist Episcopal church.
"We are careful TO state added
Mr.. Robbins, "that there is the utmost
frankness and feeling of confidence be-
tween the members of the board of Ii
cense commissioners and the superin-
tendent of the Anti Saloon league We
are perfectly confident that the com
missioners acted in good faith in issu-
ing the license, believing the location
to be the best available for the public
welfare. and believing that in making
the change as to entrance they were
conforming to the requirements of the
law as they construed it.
"We know that in number of cases
the commissioners have exercised their
discretion and refused licenses, al
though more than 200 feet from a
church. with all the conditions of loca-
ton conformable TO the letter of the
law. But in such cases there may have
been considerations of public welfare
other than the distance of the location
from a church, and the commissioners
wisely exercised such discretion. We
are convinced that the discretionary
provision of the law is wise and has
been iudiciously exercised, but in our
opinion the discretionary authority re-
auiring the commissioners for good and
sufficient reasons in their Judgment to
refuse license under certain unde-
fined conditions, as a matter of official
duty, does not permit them to grant a
license in any location clearly prohibit
ed by the terms of the statute even if
they think public welfare will be
served by so doing.
''There are two well defined reasons
why the church enters this action.
First, the saloon with its exhibits and
traffic is obnoxiously near the church;
second, it is important to ascertain the
true construction of the law. The opin-
ion of the court may sustain the con-
struction of the law adopted by the
commission. In that case it will show
that the evident intention of the legis-
lature to protect obnoxious nearness of
saloons less than 200 feet is not real
lied. This will establish the necessity
and form the basis for legislative ac-
ton in the way of amendment to the
wording of the statute to secure the de-
sired result. But it is hoped that the
higher court will reverse the decision
of the board of license commissioners
by adopting the construction of this
statute for which we contend