The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1908-10-07

The practice oil granting licenses by
Boards appointed by the local author
tiles is now being widely condemned on
account Of the powerful influence
brought to bear politically affecting 10
cal government, and even elected
Boards are not altogether satisfactory
There seems to be sentiment in favor
Of placing the granting power exclusive
ly in the Courts, and in this county at
this time this method might meet with
general approval. At the same time it
is open to objection, and in the opln-
ion Of the writer it is bad principle and
would lead as it has led in the past
to many Objectionable conditions.
1t is said that the business should
not be mixed up with politics. Can it
not be said with greater force that it
ought not to be mixed up with the adj
ministration of justice? II the County
Judge is to have exclusive control OF
this business will it not become, es-
pecially in those counties in which are
located the larger cities, an important
influence, or at least will the question
not be asked in every case, particularly
where new judge is appointed, how
does he stand on the excise question:
And while it may be that no Governor
would ever be influenced by such con-
siderations, is 1t not better to have the
possibility removed 1t is said to be a
fact that this question has had to do
with the recommendation to the Gov
eInor of more than one man who has
been appointed to such position. And
after all, while there seems to be now a
movement towards the rigid enforce
ment of the law, some cases can be
cited where Courts have not always
seemed to move that way. In this
county at least two cases can be cited
where it would seem that the Judge
had taken lenient view of one Of the
provisions of the law forbidding the Ii
censing of a place where the law had
been violated. In one case 1t was
proved that there had been repeated
sales on Sunday but there was no proof
that any of those sales had actually
been made by the landlord personally
and the license was granted. In an
other case a license was refused on ac-
count of violations of the Sunday law,
but shortly after the license was grant
ed for the same place to a brother-in-
law of the former landlord. And it is
a well.known fact that Courts have re-
CURED insome cases galtechnical proof
when license might possibly have
been refused on the ground OF moral
certainty. And possibly this latter is
the view which Courts ought to take,
because in criminal and civil business
they are required to act upon legal
technical proof, and possibly it might
be bad thing to bring them into anoth-
er branch OF business where moral Ger
tainty ought to be applied, or discretion
substituted for legal rule. The remedy
in the situation may be in State Board
for granting and revocation Of licenses.
1t has been suggested that this might be
extended by a commissioner or com.
mission in cities, and cities and coun-
ties to meet local conditions, appointed
by State Board, and whose action,
either in granting or refusing license, OF
taking steps to enforce the. law, might
be renewable by the State Commission.
As TO local option, whether by coun-
ty or other municipality, it seems to be
absolutely fair, and while in many cases
it might not be temperance legislation
in the usual sense, doubtless, if the IL
cense in places where granted was
properly regulated, it ought to be a
satisfactory condition.