Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1900-1911, 1909-04-16
LOS ANGELES HERALD: FRIDAY MORNING. APRIL 1e, 1909

will not be conducted by MIN IN u
lawful, orderly and proper manner.
The granting of permit implies
on the part of the officer or board
authorized so to do an investigation
of the personal character and repu-
tation OF the person applying for the
same, so that, by this scrutiny, the
community may be protected against
the abuse of the privilege by i'm
proper or unfit persons. Therefore,
a permit to engage in such bust
ness Is a purely personal trust, ana
implies q special confidence in the
permitee, as an individual, that the
privilege will not be abused, and
carries with 1t the presumption that
he will conduct the business in
obedience to the laws and ordi-
nances regulating the same. The
power to grant liquor permits is
confided in a board Of commission
ers here, as elsewhere, where such
a plan prevails, for the express pur-
pose of protecting the community
against the conduct of the business
by unfit or improper persons. Dis
erection is given to such board-it
may refuse the permit If the appli-
cant is unsatisfactory, and it may
grant the permit If he is satisfac-
tory. AS has been said by judicial
authority, the most important con-
dition attached to the granting of
permits to sell Intoxicating liquors
is that the person to whom the per-
NIT is granted shall possess certain
moral qualifications which render
him fit for the exercise of the privi-
lege intrusted to him.
Shows Nature of Permit
These general comments have
been made for the purpose of show
ing the nature of a liquor permit,
as believe it to be contemplated
by the ordinance of this city. A
liquor permit, under our ordinances,
does not differ in it's character from
such q permit in other places,
where special legislation has not
altered the same. And I am of
the opinion that a liquor permit
with us falls within the descrip-
ton have outlined the legal con-
siderations here set forth are of
practically uniform recognition
everywhere.
1t is true that in several ordi-
nances relating to the liquor bust
ness the board of police commits
sioners are forbidden to grant
permit for the issuing or trans
fer" Of liquor licensest under spe-
cial circumstances. See ordinance
No. 114S7 (new series), which pro-
hibits the maintenance of retail
liquor stores within 600 feet of
school buildings, and ordinance No.
1854 new serieS), establishing the
liquor zone" And 1t might be
inferred from the fact that the
phrase transfer of a liquor Ii
cense" is used therein, that there
fore the presumption arises that
the general power of the police
commission to transfer liquor
permits is recognized.
Both of these ordinances were
ordinances prohibiting the conduct
of the liquor business in certain
localities and forbidding the police
commission from putting it there
in, either directly by new permits
or indirectly by transfers" and
are wholly negative in their effect.
Such ordinances do not purport to
be, nor are they ordinances pro-
viding the manner or method of
granting liquor permits. Ordinance
No. 1926 (new series), from which
l have quoted, is the ordinance
specifically regulating that matter,
and it's provisions control. There
is no conflict between these ordi-
nances and ordinance No. 1926
(new series), and therefore no oc-
casion for construction between
repugnant ordinances. If ordi-
nance No. 1926 (new series) does
not authorize transfers, the fact
that the ordinances mentioned pro-
hibit transfers in certain special
cases does not invest the police
commission with power to grant
transfers. A power of this kind
cannot rest upon mere inference or
implication; it must appear from
express provision of law or be
founded upon some necessary i'm
plication. Considerations of mere
convenience or expediency are not
sufficient to support the exercise
of a power not expressly conferred,
and there is no power given the
board of police commissioners of
which it can be said that the power
to transfer liquor licenses is neces-
sary to its proper exercise.
Strong in Opinion
I am the more strongly of the
opinion of the correctness of this
view because of the entire absence
from the liquor ordinances of the
city of anything that could be fairly
construed to establish an assign
able property right as being inher-
ent in liquor permit. Such per-
NIT, as have said, is mere priv
ilege. wholly personal to the holder,
in the nature of a. trust, in legal
contemplation, especially confided to
him as an individual. From an ex-
. animation of the liquor ordinances
I am satisfied that no person, what
ever may be his relation to or claim
upon the holder of liquor permit,
can engage in such business unless
he himself receives a permit, grant
ed to him in the same manner, so
far as the action of the police COM
mission is concerned, as any other
permit of the same character.
In conclusion upon this question
would say that, as no person can
engage in the liquor business with
out a permit, that implies a permit
granted in the regular way in all
cases. When liquor dealer dies or
sells out or for any other reason his
permit becomes imperative, any
other person desiring to conduct
such business at the same place
must himself obtain a new permit.
The police commission can and
should in any such case treat such
an application as an original one
and govern it's action thereon in
the sale manner. A transferred
permit would be an evasion of this
requirement; the permit so trans
ferred" was granted to another per-
son in the first instance, and so far
as such permit purports to au-
.thorize the holder thereof to con-
duct the liquor business without a
new permit is in my judgment I'M
authorized.
No Power to Transfer
In answer to your first question,
you are advised that the police
commission has no power to grant
transfers Of liquor permits.
Referring to your second inquiry,